The Wolf Of All Streets - Hinman Bombshell - Ripple, Binance, Coinbase Strike Back

Episode Date: June 14, 2023

John E. Deaton and Eleanor Terrett discuss Hinman's papers and what it means to the future of crypto. Chris Inks to share his market ideas in the second half of the stream.  ►►OKX Sign up for an OKX Trading Account then deposit & trade to unlock mystery box rewards of up to $60,000!  👉 https://www.okx.com/join/SCOTTMELKER  ►►THE DAILY CLOSE BRAND NEW NEWSLETTER! INSTITUTIONAL GRADE INDICATORS AND DATA DELIVERED DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX, EVERY DAY AT THE DAILY CLOSE. TRADE LIKE THE BIG BOYS. 👉 https://www.thedailyclose.io/   ►►NORD VPN  GET EXCLUSIVE NORDVPN DEAL - 40% DISCOUNT! IT’S RISK-FREE WITH NORD’S 30-DAY MONEY-BACK GUARANTEE. PROTECT YOUR PRIVACY! 👉 https://nordvpn.com/WolfOfAllStreets   ►►COINROUTES TRADE SPOT & DERIVATIVES ACROSS CEFI AND DEFI USING YOUR OWN ACCOUNTS WITH THIS ADVANCED ALGORITHMIC PLATFORM. SAVE TONS OF MONEY ON TRADING FEES LIKE THE PROS! 👉 http://bit.ly/3ZXeYKd  ►► JOIN THE FREE WOLF DEN NEWSLETTER, DELIVERED EVERY WEEK DAY! 👉https://thewolfden.substack.com/   Follow Scott Melker: Twitter: https://twitter.com/scottmelker   Web: https://www.thewolfofallstreets.io   Spotify: https://spoti.fi/30N5FDe   Apple podcast: https://apple.co/3FASB2c   #Bitcoin #Crypto #Trading The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own and should in no way be interpreted as financial advice. This video was created for entertainment. Every investment and trading move involves risk. You should conduct your own research when making a decision. I am not a financial advisor. Nothing contained in this video constitutes or shall be construed as an offering of financial instruments or as investment advice or recommendations of an investment strategy or whether or not to "Buy," "Sell," or "Hold" an investment.

The much-anticipated release of the Hinman Dox finally happened after about 18 months. Yesterday, dropping hot on the streets like a new Drake album, some calling it an absolute bombshell, and some saying, uh, absolute nothing burger. And I guess that depends on which side you're on. If you're looking at it through the lens of XRP, if you're looking at it through the lens of ETH, or if you're just an angry Bitcoin maxi who thinks that anything Hinman said means that everything is a security and all crypto must die. We're going to dive into all of that today with John Deaton and Eleanor Tarrant, arguably the two people who have been the most on top of the Ripple case. We've had them all on Twitter spaces, but great to have them here. And then on the back end,

we're still going to have, of course, Christopher Inks come on. We're going to talk about some charts and trades and how the market is reacting to all this of course after cpi yesterday fomc today guys there is just endless news to talk about right now you guys don't want to miss this one let's go let's go what is up everybody i am scott melker also known as the wolf of all streets before we get started please subscribe to the channel and tenderly swipe the like button with your right pinky i actually don't really care i'm not convinced that there's really such thing as a YouTube algorithm. But I guess we would find out if I did this in the thumbnails, which I obviously don't do. But maybe then we would see if it gets you a million people to show up. Speaking of a million people to show up, I was astounded when I woke up this morning, looked back at the Twitter spaces from yesterday, and it had 1.5 million views.

Of course, if you may have missed it, we had Warren Davidson, who proposed the SEC Stabilization Act, a.k.a. the hashtag FireGaryGenslerAct, speaking about why he did that, his position there. Really interesting interview. We only were on spaces for about an hour, but clearly it was extremely engaging. But that's not what we're going to talk about today. That's already yesterday's news that we're firing Gary Gensler. Today's news is the Hinman Docs. I'm going to go ahead and bring on our guests right now so we can dive into it. John and Eleanor, how are you guys both doing today? A lot going on over there, huh? Definitely a lot going on.

So I had John, I said i had john rice on yesterday from blockworks it was nine in the morning his team was going through he said 2 000 pages of documents or something but he was awaiting some massive bombshell coming at 11 and it seems like we already had basically everything there was to see by that time and maybe there's nothing massively new here. Eleanor, I mean, do you think that we saw anything massively revealing yesterday? Or do you think that it's kind of par for the course for what we already knew with Hinman? Yeah, I think we definitely kind of knew what was coming down in terms of, you know, basically what

John has said for a long time is the argument at the Hinman documents is that it will most likely go towards helping Ripple's fair notice defense as opposed to some kind of crazy bombshell where it's like, you know, XRP was talked about and completely shunned. So I think a lot of people were hoping for that bombshell. I don't think we got it. I think there was a lot of telling information in there about other things such as, you know, kind of relationship that the SEC had with the Ethereum Foundation, with Vitalik Buterin, with, you know, and then kind of just that relationship as opposed to like having a relationship with anybody else in the space. So I think that was, you know, a key aspect and I'll let John get into it more.

But I mean, as far as bombshells go, I really don't think so. And, you know, John, you can get into, you know, if you're a Ripple maxi, then, you know, you think it's you think it's everything. If you're a Bitcoin maxi, you think it's can get in and say, you know, if you're a Ripple maxi, then, you know, you think it's everything. If you're a Bitcoin maxi, you think it's a nothing burger, right? And interestingly, I think you mentioned it's the Ethereum sort of fans in the middle, or maybe those who are looking to the definition of Ethereum as a security or commodity who are really digging into this, which is sort of the collateral damage or advantage here for the whole market that's coming out of this Ripple case. I think maybe it is a nothing burger for the Ripple that's coming out of this ripple case i think maybe it is a nothing burger for the ripple people but not necessarily for eat so john i want

you to talk about that a bit and then we're going to watch the video from student uh stewart uh this the counsel for ripple to give us some context here on all this yeah well scott you know before the emails came out i i said listen there's been so much hype and build-up about the emails came out, I said, listen, there's been so much hype and buildup about the emails. You're talking about two years, seven court orders. And I said, when there's something hype that much, likely going to disappoint. It depends on your perspective, like you said. The reality is this, there's nothing in this speech that's going to affect the judge's analysis of whether Ripple sold XRP as an investment contract. There's nothing in there.

And even if Bill Hinman had said XRP is not a security, the judge could disregard that because he's one official at the SEC. She's going to analyze it. It does go to the fair notice issue because it shows, and more importantly, it goes to the individual guys. Remember, Brad Gardinghouse and Chris Larson are sued individually, and the SEC's theory that they must prove is that they were reckless in not knowing XRP wasn't a security, and that standard means recklessness is met when it's so obvious an ordinary person would know that XRP is a security. So when you see the debate going back and forth about digital assets and whether or not

the SEC has jurisdiction or what is a security, how do you apply these 1930s laws to modern day blockchain technology, that helps the individual defendants win you know, win that case. And so, but you mentioned the video Ripple did, you know, put out a piece that sort of summarized the highlights. I think it would be beneficial for your audience. It's four minutes long, guys. I mean, that's a bit longer than things we show, but I think it speaks to exactly what you just said, which is that it seems like the Ripple guys just want mass confusion. They want to show that the SEC had no idea what they were doing here and can't firmly state that there was any wrongdoing because if you watch this

as a lay person it almost feels like this would be against the crypto community right that the sec itself is saying dude don't say all this stuff and hinman's some wild card uh lone gun who's out there saying a bunch of things that the SEC doesn't believe but then you dig into it and the SEC left it up and Clayton referred to it so let's just watch the video guys about four minutes but I think it's really important context 14th 2018 then SEC director of corporation finance William Hinman gave a high profile speech where he declared that a token is not a security when it becomes quote sufficiently decentralized but internal emails and documents show that senior SEC officials repeatedly warned Inman that his speech wasn't true to the law and would greatly confuse the markets

even more than they already were now after more than two years and seven court orders we can finally share some of what we found in the Hinman speech documents. The SEC head of trading and markets warned Hinman that he was making up factors that, quote, go beyond the typical Howey analysis, as in not in the law, and that the speech could lead to not just confusion, but greater confusion on what is a security. Hinman ignored him. If the network on which the token or coin is to function is sufficiently decentralized, and the purchasers no longer have a reasonable expectation that a person or a group is going to carry out essential managerial or entrepreneurial efforts, those assets might not represent an

investment contract. The same official told Hinman he should tie his speech, quote, more closely and explicitly to the Howey analysis. Hinman not only ignored him, but deliberately created factors beyond those identified by the Supreme Court in the Howey case. I wanted to just note a few things. This list is not meant to be exhaustive, but these are things that we look at. The SEC's own general counsel warned specifically that it's legally irrelevant if someone retains a stake in

a token and is motivated to take action to increase its value, and that Hinman should delete it from the speech. And once again, Hinman ignored them, and said without any legal support that it was important to ask. Both Trading and Markets and the General Counsel also disagreed with Hinman's belief that if a network was sufficiently decentralized, information asymmetries would no longer exist, noting that a network creator would likely have more information than a retail holder, using Vitalik Buterin as an example. They warned Hinman that by creating this quote, other category and focusing on information asymmetries, he was exposing a regulatory gap that the SEC may not have the jurisdiction

to fill. Again, Hinman ignored them. As a network becomes more truly decentralized, the ability to even to identify a promoter Again, Hinman ignored them. On June 4, Hinman wrote that he didn't see a quote, need to regulate Ether as a security, and set up a call with Ethereum's co-founder Vital Vitalik Buterin, later that week to, quote, confirm our understanding. On June 11, the SEC's own general counsel advised against including any direct statement about Ether in the speech because it would be difficult for the SEC to, quote, take a different position on Ether in the future. The next day, Trading and Markets wrote that the statements about Ether were, quote, likely to create more confusion. Hinman ignored all of them

and decided to make headlines, picking winners and losers instead. Tomorrow we're putting aside the fundraising that accompanied the creation of Ether. Based on my understanding of the present state of Ether, the Ethereum network, its decentralized structure, we believe current offers and state of Ether, the Ethereum network, its decentralized structure, we believe current offers and sales of Ether are not securities transactions. The emails show that Hinman knew he wasn't following the law, he knew he was making things up, and he knew that his speech would result in greater confusion in an already confused market. But Hinman went ahead with the speech anyway. And the SEC,

despite knowing all this, touted the speech repeatedly. The SEC chairman himself pointed market participants to the speech. Bill Hinman recently outlined the approach we take to evaluate whether a digital asset is a security. And I encourage you to take a look at Bill's speech which is available on our website. The SEC knew the speech didn't follow the law. The SEC knew the speech would create greater confusion and the SEC knew Hinman was making things up. So why is the Hinman speech still on the SEC's website? Why was it ever allowed to be given at all and why has the sec pushed a policy of regulation by enforcement falsely insisting the rules are clear there's so much sun packed there like listen but as a lay person looking from the outside it seems like the

sec's major problem here is a clearly they have no cohesive message but him and is effectively saying that you can morph from being a security into not being a security right and i believe i read that the speech originally was actually called digital asset morphing or something like that right something to that effect and the very idea that you could have that safe harbor or transition from security to uh being decentralized just violates everything that Gary Gensler and the SEC are saying now. Is that the word, Liz? Absolutely, Scott. We learned a couple of things.

One, we learned the SEC itself should not be touching digital assets. I mean, just look at the reason why the general counsel of the SEC said, I think you should take the ETH out of the speech. Don't say that. Did he say because you're not following the law? Scott, he said, because it will limit our ability to take a contrary position in the future. I mean, is that how we want our financial market regulated? Never make a clear rule exactly in matter of fact in one of the uh brett redfern who was the director of trading markets and one is his comments he said you need this is going to cause greater confusion uh and you need to give less detail in other ways keep

it vague keep it vague you're going to confuse people and we want to make it vague. And so, so yes, you're spot on about that. And no, I want to see it right here. Look, crossed out, digital asset morphing called digital asset transaction under the Securities Act of 1933. I found it. And you're right. When you go to the first draft of the speech, it's not a draft, it's an outline. And it's called what you said, morphing into a non-security. But just know for your audience, Hinman, when he replied, he called it the ETH speech. So from the very beginning, Hinman called it the ETH speech. And the reason people need to know that's important is that in the speech, he says Bitcoin and ETH are not securities. He doesn't

call it the Bitcoin ETH speech. He doesn't call it what it was normally called. He called it the ETH speech for a reason. So the one thing I said, and I predict it, and this did come true, I said that when the emails come out, it'll make people scratch their head more. Why would you give this speech, which goes to certain specific reasons we can talk about or not to other people eleanor why then give the speech i mean isn't this the uh hashtag eth gate conspiracy theory vitalik buterin and consensus they convinced him they were just said i mean it is kind of strange to go to the founder and say hey are you guys decentralized and what does that mean and then give a speech about it which is what it seems like happens here and i'm not claiming any of these things i just think that's the

narrative then surrounding that where that leads is that right eleanor yeah and i've john and i both said from the beginning that we wouldn't say that there was corruption here and i still don't you know i i'm not one to say i'm not a lawyer so i i always stick by my i do think that there are big conflicts of interest here and johnny went and said this on twitter yesterday basically the same thing like you know a blind monkey could see that, you know, there's, there's, there's issues here. And the fact that the SEC ethics office wasn't copied, or wasn't privy to this speech, and you know, Hinman had been working for Simpson Thatcher at the time, he went back to Simpson Thatcher, he's there now as the advisor, there are these conflicts

of interest. And you think, well, as you read read these emails and the redactions are gone and you see the correspondence and especially the Boudarin line, you yesterday. So like not everything had come out yet. And I said, you know, I tweeted something like, you know, I think my biggest takeaway right now is the fact that, you know, the SEC officials here clearly thought that they were kind of collaborating on this thing, that they were giving their best advice that this was going to be market guidance. And, you know, and I thought, you know, SEC, because they've argued they they flip-flopped, right? They said it was supposed to be market guidance. Oh, no, it wasn't. It was just a personal opinion. So I said, this goes a long way to showing that the SEC thought it was going to be market guidance, kind of shoots down their argument. But then I'm looking at the stuff from Hinman and everything

that was suggested that he didn't put in there. And then I'm thinking to myself, was that just a personal opinion? Did he kind of go rogue? can the sec argue it was a personal opinion because he ignored so much advice about eath about you know existing market existing seems like it's a personal opinion based on how many things he ignored so i was just like i was like my head hurts like i i can look at it one way and i look at another and it's just you know it's it's an interesting contrast right but can you give i i understand that at that moment, if you watch that speech, you would think this is this guy's personal opinion. He's gone completely rogue.

Look at the evidence. But then Jay Clayton points to the speech specifically and they leave it on their website for years. Right. And that would mean that. I think it's like, talk about morphing. We morph from personal opinion right into market guidance. Well, I think the important thing to know is that the market was desperate for some

form of clarity. And they wouldn't talk about Bitcoin at first. And finally, there's this consensus that Bitcoin is not security. What about ETH? What about XRP? What about these other major cap tokens? And you had Hester Peirce out there who I think has good intentions. And so what happened is once he committed to the speech and it's out there and the market was dying for it, you had Hester Peirce, the commissioner, Robert Jackson, the commissioner,

the director of trading markets, they all said, okay, we've accepted it. It is guidance. Look at that. And what people need to understand, she brought up about the ethics department. If you look at the email chain, all these different departments got this speech, except for the ethics division of the SEC. And your guest on Spaces yesterday, Congressman Warren Davidson, to his credit, he's paid attention and he asked the SEC enforcement director. While under oath, he said, did Hinman have that speech screened by the ethics office at the SEC? And the SEC enforcement director goes, oh, I can't comment because of litigation. The ethics issue is never litigated.

Just whether or not the speech is privileged or not, he refused to answer it because we know the truth. Scott, it works like this. Whoa, you're going to give ETH regulatory clarity? That's big news. So we just got to make sure since we never talk about specific tokens before and after, Scott, no one will talk about any specific token this one time you're going to mention e we just got to make sure bill you don't own bitcoin or eth right no you're loft gun since you're an ongoing profit sharing partner you're not retired you're getting profits as they make it do they have any connection oh they're doing the canon ipo which is ETH hardware and Bitcoin

hardware. Oh, your firm's a member of the Enterprise Ethereum Alliance. Bill, you can't give that speech. It would take a paralegal in their first year to uncover that conflict. It would take less than an hour. But then that's the head scratchers. Why would the SEC leave it on their website and continue to refer to it as reference for how digital assets should be classified that is that just stupidity i literally don't understand it because it seems to be clear that at that day there was a clear conflict of interest he gave a rogue speech and they should have said dude hinman's out right no no you're right the only answer i can give you is yes is the genie's out of the bottle we can't put the genie back in.

The market's thirsty, dying for some type of clarity. And then of course, the sufficient decentralization, he added a factor to the Howey test. I can assure you there's no Howey prong that says how decentralized are you? And imagine if Scott, if you were in in power if you called david schwartz the cto of ripple and said hey i'm going to give this speech that the xrp ledger is sufficiently decentralized do you agree that's what i'm saying it's a joke i'd be i think a claim like no bill uh i'd actually rather you go the other way with that and cause me a decade of legal troubles please but uh i i'm still it's just interesting to me that this is still viewed certainly by garlinghouse and those guys and you made the case it makes sense for them personally but i don't even see how you can make the leap from what hinman did here to somehow saying that

xrp is not a security i don't see how you make that jump and that's a lot of people maybe incorrectly are viewing this as no they are and but here's the thing people uh were like well why did brad garland house say that you will be shocked and you got to look at from his prism for example it's not just the speech what was in that video you played that is a central point ripple was targeted was targeted. And that's a fact. I've said before that they're going to give Etherpass and Ripple and SRP would be the sacrificial regulatory land. Right?

And that because the general counsel said whether or not a group of people own a token and are motivated to increase its value is irrelevant. I don't think you should put that in the speech, yet he kept it in the speech. Whose shot does that apply to? It applies to Ripple. They own 50% of XRP.

So that's where I think when Brad Garland goes shocked, he's like, wow, like they literally- It doesn't matter that we own 50% of the supply. It doesn't matter if we were sending that potentially to exchanges and selling at strategic times, which by the way, the ETH Foundation has notoriously done at the top of every single ETH cycle. So I don't think that that's unusual. Yeah, that's the number one, like the heart of their case, Scott, is, well, you

you gave a million, offered a million dollars to, I believe it's Kraken, and five million to Coinbase to list XRP and things of that nature that that other people have done. You had market makers doing programmatic sales. I mean, that's really the essence of the SEC's case, in my opinion. And so, but I just wanted people to understand from my belief of why Brad or someone would say you're shocked. Well, if you're the one that was sued and they're seeking your bank accounts and coming after you and targeting you, and then you learn this, it would be shocking from your personal perspective. Let's say that the best case scenario happens here for xrp or for ripple and they they win and i think we know that doesn't really mean they win right they win this but the

sec can approach it in different ways i think we've been pretty clear about that but you just talked about the fact that they paid for the listing on coinbase and crack and all these things well when this case came out and it was deemed a security by the SEC, those very same exchanges quickly delisted and did arguably harm to Ripple and to XRP. And we're seeing that nobody else is getting delisted now. I don't know if it's just fatigue and they've listed 60 of them and Coinbase obviously isn't just going to go delist 60 things in the middle of this fight but you think that ripple if they win has a counter suit here to say listen you look how much harm you've done to our company and to our pro our project and our and our coin through this entire process and our investors john you know you know better than anyone because you represent you know 75 000 xrp investors who have can you hear me? Yeah, we can. You broke up with him, but it might've been my internet or yours. Yeah. Yeah, you're good. You're good. No, I was just saying, I mean, you know, not just the company, they've been forced to go overseas.

They can't operate in the US and you know, that hurts not just their business. I mean, they're, they're a profitable company. They have a lot of cash on hand. We know for, from Brad Garlinghouse that they spent about $200 to $250 million fighting this lawsuit. So, you know, they're not strapped for cash, but at the same time, it's their reputation, it's their investors, and Johnny represents 75,000 of them. So there's that harm as well. John, what happens there for those 75,000 people in the best and worst case scenario, as we kind of figure out? You know, going after the SEC you've got issues of sovereign immunity,

qualified immunity. Going after the government for gross negligence is almost impossible. Bernie Madoff is probably the best example. Everyone knows the story of how the SEC was told like half a dozen times. This guy runs a Ponzi. Investors sued the SEC by saying, look, you had all this evidence and you never prosecuted them and we lost all this money. The judge dismissed it because it's discretionary and it's executive

branch versus the judicial branch, separation of powers. The real issue here, Scott, and it's something that certain people should be concerned with, is whether or not a class of investors that I represent have a case of regulatory capture against certain people and certain entities. That's in the civil court. And maybe some days you might hear something about that. It's not going to be today, is it? No. That's the bombshell.

That's the bombshell. Is that the bombshell that we're really waiting for here? Right. So then I guess FTX creditors who are angry that the SEC was meeting with SBF and did nothing about it aren't going to have much of a case or any recourse here then, right? I mean, usually not. Now, the question what we need is if you can prove criminality and things of that nature, there's always a, you know, you've got one standard here, and then there's this huge abuse of discretion and all this that you can overcome. But you have to have a wealth of facts and information. You can't just sue because you'll get dismissed. criminal investigation or an ig investigation there should be an investigation into the speech and how it was formed and all the emails and there there should be an investigation of that ftx

meeting meeting two times with gensler what was said was there really a short form registration form that the rumor has tom emmer brought this up uh that they had negotiated a short form to give FTX an advantage that would have hurt their competitors. I mean, this stuff needs to be really looked at. Yeah, I love that when Gensler was asked under oath about meeting with SBF, he said, My calendar shows two official meetings. But we know. We went to dinner 17 times. He picks up on that, right?

We've got separate calendars, though. My official calendar recall. It's been pretty wildly reported that SBF was effectively working on a deal that would make them, as the people helping to create this legislation,

safe from any harm that could come of it. While he was meeting to create this legislation safe from any harm that could come of it. But, you know, while he was meeting, while he was meeting the Bernie Madoff of crypto, the, the, the number one publicly traded,

the only publicly traded exchange, number one in America, a U S business, the CEO couldn't get a meeting. I don't know if you remember when Brian Armstrong tweeted out that he was told that Gensler would not meet with any crypto companies. And then shortly thereafter, he's meeting with SBF. And he's meeting with not just SBF, but with IEX too, because FTX and IEX wanted to make the first regulatory approved, SEC approved crypto exchange.

Charlie and I reported that, you know, now that FTX has gone away, IEX is actually talking to Coinbase about it. Now Coinbase is getting sued. Fun. Stay away from IEX. I mean, Eleanor, what do you think the prospects are here that we see huge victories against the SEC and what kind of timeline? I think the timeline will be long. And John, you could speak more to this just from the legal standpoint, but I do think that people are going to drag this out. And by people, I think the SEC, I don't think the government necessarily wants to lose to the people and lose to this cause that they're not on board with. Obviously, Gary Gensler has made it very clear that he's going after crypto.

He wants to make his name on cracking down on crypto, being the chairman that got it under regulation, got it to come into compliance. So when these companies push back, you know, they could have all the money in the world. But at the end of the day, you're fighting the government as well. So, you know, I think it's going to be a long process. I think Ripple will be the first step in that. And then you'll see Coinbase, you'll see Grayscale, Binance now, like you've got so many companies and so many big names coming out, you know, and people are supporting them. It's just, it's hard to fight the government. Right, John? VCs and smaller exchanges just so that Gensler can get a whole bunch of easy settlement wins under his belt. Unfortunately, I'm not trying to go tin hat, but I don't think this is done.

I think they're going to drag out these large ones and then angle for a ton of settlements that give them precedent in between. I just find it really interesting that the Ripple case is not Gensler's, right? It's Clayton's. And the Coinbase and Binance cases will be solved long after Gensler's gone, whether he leaves in a positive or negative manner. So it's literally just seems like a massive PR campaign to me. And I have to tell you, talking about calendars, Clayton dropped this suit against Ripple and his last day as he's walking out the door. But guess who he met the day before, Scott, to talk about? He met with Gary Gensler. Who is it?

We can say it's Clayton, but it's Gensler, right? You don't drop something, a bomb on your predecessor, on the next guy coming in without briefing him and making sure he's cool with it. Exactly. You said it perfectly in that scenario. And, you know, here's the thing is that this, even if the Ripple case itself, this judge is ruling legally, it's just one federal district judge. It's not an appellate court. It has limited, you know, uh, precedential value and all of that. Uh, even a, Even a fellow Southern District New York judge on the Coinbase case could disagree with this judge because they're of equal level.

However, the industry desperately needs some good news coming out of the Ripple case. Even if you hate Ripple, even if you think they dumped on retail, all of those things, right, 100%. You need to not root for Ripple, but root against the SEC's overreach. And hopefully

we get that. Because at least if the judge were to bless the SEC's theory, which I don't think she will because it's so overbroad, but if she did, it would get... Can you imagine Gary Gensler, how he's going to use that politically? And it's sort of almost... I'll make a cute little cartoon video and it'll have Kim Kardashian's butt dancing by or something.

He already used his library. And that was a small... John, you worked on that case. It was a small, small case. But they bring it up every chance now. Like, we won against libraries. So could you imagine what he's going to say? If they lose the Ripple case, then Gensler will say, oh, it's facts and circumstances.

Each case is different, and each case has different facts, and it's not that big of a deal. But if the SEC were to win, it would be a huge PR campaign for Gensler, and that's all he wants. That's all he wants. I'm convinced he literally doesn't care if he wins, loses, these after he's gone. I'm convinced he's just, this is like one long job interview for him.

And he views, by the way, he's not getting any better jobs. He's hated everywhere from what I hear. But, you know, he probably is not willing to. You know that he was the kid that didn't get picked and took his basketball and went home. That first game of pickup. You know that. That's who he is. Yeah. kid that didn't get picked and took his basketball went home and that first game of pickup you know that that's who he is yeah he had to the napoleon complex all day for for for sure so even the best case scenario then for for ripple and for xrp holders doesn't necessarily mean the best case

for crypto do you think that we will see one of these cases potentially rise to the Supreme Court for final clarity? I think the best case is Ripple, A, because it has its first in line. It's got a two-year head start on the Coinbase case. If you look at the Ripple summary judgment brief, it's really, when it came out, I said, it's a brilliant brief and I hate it. It's written for the second circuit because it's all about case law and all about, you know, the inherent nature of an investment contract and security and blah, blah, blah. So if Ripple loses, it's definitely going to the second circuit. You know, if the SEC loses, I don't think they appeal because why would they, they're getting blasted. Almost in every court hearing, you hear

the judge is taking issue with the way the SEC is conducting themselves. Even to the Grayscale judge, the Voyager bankruptcy judge, and they were so dismissive, not like, Hey, maybe clarify. I mean, and meanwhile, yesterday, for anyone who was watching, I'm going to let you guys go in like five minutes, but I've got your captive attention. But the Coinbase, right? The Coinbase was supposed to get an immediate answer on there. And it's like, and the SEC said,

how about four more months? And Binance, Binance as well. Binance was supposed to get a, what is it, a temporary restraining order. And apparently from what the reports I saw, you know, the judge was kind of taking the SEC to task and she said, you know, I don't see grounds for giving you this temporary restraining order. So go away, figure it out yourselves and come back. Yeah, Binance did the right thing. Listen, Binance came in and said, listen,

and this isn't like me, you know, promoting Binance. I'm just telling you the facts. They came in and said, here are all the customer accounts in the United States of US investors. Here's the private keys, US government, SEC. They're protected 100%. You're in control. We can't move it or touch the money, but don't freeze us. The SEC's initial response, no, because they want destruction. They want it to freeze it. They were like, we won't make payroll. If you freeze our accounts, we can't pay our employees. And the judge was taken back by the SEC being so unreasonable. And so, you know, and let's not forget the judge in Ripple literally said the SEC does not have a faithful allegiance

to the law. I mean, that's astounding. They're a bad faith regulator, and literally anyone with a brain knows it, but that doesn't mean that they won't win. Eleanor, I have to ask you, you always seem to get the scoops. You're first on top of all of this. Okay, so Hinman's passed. I can't tell you what the next bombshell is, though, but what is the next big news you're looking for?

I mean, is it literally just this case comes to a conclusion at this point? Because Hinman's been the top for like two years, it feels like. Right. So is it now we just kind of sit and wait and see how this resolves? And when when can we potentially see that happen? Yeah, I think the next big thing to look out for will be the outcome of summary judgment. You know, I listened to an interview with Brad Garlinghouse at the end of May, he said it's looking more like weeks, not months. So you would think as a CEO, you might be privy to some of those private talks where they're thinking about timelines and such. So yeah, I think that's the big next thing to watch.

Obviously, that'll have big precedent that'll have a big impact on the industry. But also just keep an eye out for more stuff from Gensler, because I hear he's not done. You know, we saw Coinbase, we saw Binance, he went after, went bigger, went home, he went after the biggest players. But to your point, Scott, I think he's going to start going for the smaller people because he thinks he can probably get a win over them with that sort of easier, not taking on corporations or big companies. Yeah, they love to tout the like 96% success rate in court and then you dig into it and it's literally just a bunch of people who can't afford to defend themselves. How many entities can afford $200 million in legal fees? And startups too. You can't. And you look at library, the library CEO said, Jeremy Klothman

said that they said, we will bankrupt you. And then they proceeded to cost them a couple million before the lawsuit and then filed the lawsuit on the eve of statute limitations cost them a couple more million and bankrupted them and and i always say scott when i come in for a moment on the settlement i always say i i always say if you really look at the lBC token, it really was using the platform. It's a utility token. Yeah, and I represented Naomi Brockwell when we went in there. And the SEC agreed, since she's never sold or purchased an LBC token, that she didn't own an investment contract when thousands and thousands of others were like her. And the judge said, well, will you give them clarity on that?

And I'll be able to publish this transcript soon. And the FCC said, we don't do that. And so that's why I went in trying to make sure that his order didn't apply to secondary market sales. Scott, can I tell you something else I'm watching? Please. So if you guys are watching, I caught the tail end of it yesterday. But the House Financial Services Committee hearing, they interviewed, they heard testimony from this guy named Aaron Kaplan, who is the CEO of Prometheum.

Prometheum, I feel like it wasn't made as big of news as it should be, unless I just completely missed it at the end of May, but they've recently got a license to be a custodial, you know, a custody holder for cryptocurrencies in the United States. They're SEC approved, they're FINRA approved. It just so happens that the CEO, I had coffee with him once, he believes that, we didn't talk about every single altcoin or every single crypto, but he said to me, because he knew I was covering the Ripple case, like, well, XRP is clearly a security.

So, you know, he's got these kind of these these these um tendencies to to talk at the same points as gensler as the sec the dems brought him as their witness so that the reason why why did he why did promethean get that special license to be a custody holder and or a custody you know a wallet provider in yeah but we have these now registered people and they get the you know blessing from the sec but then you can't trade any of the actual crypto on her yeah scott i don't know i don't know if you saw the congressman take that ceo to task did you see that clip if not i'll send it to you uh where he's like they can't even trade bitcoin they can't even trade ethereum and so

and it's the same guy that sent a letter you letter a year and a half ago saying how desperately there needed to be new regulations. All of a sudden, he flipped. I'd like to see his calendar and who he met before. We had one in the office, 17 at the restaurant. But yeah, whatever. Well, guys, I think I've taken up enough of your time not only today, but I feel like I've been harassing both of you constantly with spaces.

You're doing a great job. You are. I appreciate it. I'm a big fan of you. I think you're one of the good guys in this. You and I have a lot of parallels. Everybody calls me an XRP attorney. Like you, 75% 75 of me it's bitcoin

but you have bitcoin maxis hate me oh boy they get super that yeah they get they're really after me lately i love it to be honest because it gives me an excuse to uh trigger them but hey well keep doing what you're doing we love our hobbies uh well thank you both so much and as this uh progresses obviously we'd love to have you back here and both on spaces to just keep us updated. Makes my life a lot easier if I don't have to read and I can just listen to you guys. Thanks, Scott. Thank you, John. And everybody, please follow both of them.

I'm hoping if it's not in the description already on YouTube, we'll make sure we put both your guys' Twitters there. Thank you. Thank you. Awesome, right, guys? How do you like my new show? Yeah, no, usually on on wednesdays obviously it's just me and chris and uh don't think that chris is gone he's not we just uh pushed it to the back so that we could get some more people in here before we start talking about the charts

that we got i do have chris here what's up man how are you you were sick yesterday right yeah do what you're sick weren't you are you still sad yeah man i, right? Do what? You were sick, weren't you? Are you still sad? Yeah, man. I'm still kind of a little bit down, but I'm back though. I'm not out. I'm not out. Listen, guys, the plan here is that we're going to, instead of just wildly looking at everything on the sun, I want when Chris comes in and potentially other guests charting on

different days, we want to look at the best best ideas right now. Like, what are you looking at? Here's the three or four things, whatever that you're most focused on at this exact moment to guide, I really zoom in for you guys and help you kind of figure out how to start looking at the market and where you should be focusing at any given moment. So let's go ahead and do that right now. I'm going to bring up your screen. Tell us what you're looking at. Well, the first one I got here is NVIDIA. You know, everybody was talking about, you know, I mean, it totally, you know, my target originally was here and then we had that big gap up and, you know, it surprised everybody, flew up there.

And then of course, you've got, everybody was already calling tops all along the way. Can you make higher? I say, oh, it definitely has to be topped here and um i have said no i you know as long as we're holding right here at support i think we've got 450 potentially 500 on on like a final push i do think that uh i think it's final push too though yeah i think stocks are kind of getting to that uh toward the end of it but a lot of these stocks i'm looking at like five up so i'm after're done, I'm looking for a three back and then continuation higher. But this one right here, I'm looking for us to rally up to maybe about 446 or so. That's right around that daily R1 pivot. And if we get that, I expect that we're going to have a pullback. And that pullback I want to see continue to hold support right around this kind kind of lows area here if we can do that it starts rallying up again then I will look up there 490

which gets us pretty close to 500 it's a psychological number so if we're rallying to 490 we could quite potentially hit 500 even pop out a bit higher but you know as always we've got invalidation or levels that we're going to look at in case it doesn't follow through. And, you know, basically there's this, you know, there's this big gap here. And if we're falling into that, especially for getting below this, this daily pivot, this is right around, right around 356 or so. 56. Yeah. Yeah. If we're getting through that, I think, I think that says we're done. And, you know, we minimally, we fill in the pivot pivot, or I'm sorry, the... Yeah, the 290, yeah. Yeah, they had at least 300, but, yeah, I mean, I think we've still got some further upside on NVIDIA right now.

Here's my prediction looking at that chart. You pop up to 446, massive overbought bear div, and then you get that retracement. Yeah, I mean, yeah, exactly. But I'm going to watch for it, though, man. If we only get pulled back into this kind of this 370 370 already have the div then the div then the blood bearer's divergence will be there already if i mean if it turned right now it looks like you know uh not obviously counting wicks you could have that so yeah yeah yeah so that's that's the

first one i'm kind of really looking at here uh People are going to hate me for this one, but I'm going to talk about it anyway, because it honestly, it looks pretty all right. So this is BNB. I, I, I think I agree. I was, I was kind of looking at it. I was like, ah, nice tip. We got it. We got us. This right here is the weekly. So we get a better look at this, but I mean, man, this looks pretty clear, like, like you know five up and then an a a b and then one two three four five so got like a flat correction here we dipped just below this uh 220 swing low here i know there was some talk uh people were worried about that that b and b hacker uh he's got like uh millions of uh dollars on on loan or something uh and people were worried about if,

because he's coming up close to the liquidation of his loan, and people were worried about, oh, if that happens, a lot of self-pressure on BNB. But, you know, the chain itself, whatever, they came out and said, you know, they had done some kind of government thing or whatever, some vote last year, and said that if something like this happened,

you know, they'd be covering it with the chain itself. So I don't think that, I think that's what gave it the bump there. And it's not really, uh, um, I don't think it's really an issue. Uh, I've got, uh, 426.20 as this, uh, local one, two, three here. And then this larger one, two, three is up here around a thousand dollars, thousand seven. Now now in order to get that you know we need a breakout above wave b here at 350 uh and then a breakout above this wave b at 669 and 30 sets those would be the areas where it's like okay yeah it's most likely doing that um but if we zoom in here you can see here on the weekly we're already oversold starting to curl a bit um if we jump over here to let's get here You see that the daily here stoke our size just breaking out

You can see we've got this pull back into all this volume here down there at the s4 pivot by the way We ran the pivots we got rejected around the pivot here ran all the way through the s4 Most likely that's going to be complete now if it continues going down lower you know i look here at this uh 206 area but i i think it's done or just about um you know finishing that up following up on the weekly let me show you something real oh sorry i was just gonna say this is the first ever test 200 ma has only existed obviously since august 21 guys so you know 200 ma on a weekly means this thing has to have been trading on that exchange for 200 weeks.

Right. So long before you can even get one, but this is the first ever test of the 200 ma in the history of this for people who do watch those, you know, we've been talking about obviously the 200 ma on Bitcoin, which it just lost by the way on the weekly. But this is the first test ever.

And right now on the weekly putting in a bit of a hammer. So yeah, I don't think miserable. I'm going to go back to you here. Yeah. I mean, if we're looking at this, we've potentially got a one, two, three, four, five, or maybe one, two, one, two, three, four, five, is this a three or four and a five? The idea is we should get rejected probably right around this two 55 to 60 area. If we can push up a bit further, uh, we'd just be looking to pull back maybe around two 35 or something like that. this 255, 260 area, if we can push up a bit further. We'd just be looking to pull back maybe around 235 or something like that. And then we just look for it to start rallying up once more on that one. So a lot of people are probably going to get a lot of hate comments for that.

But are you crazy? It's BNB, Binance, and all this. But I think traders do well to stay away from news and news events and just kind of trade the charts. Well, I think just rationally, listen, if you believe any of the FUD or you've dug in and you think that Binance is selling all their Bitcoin to defend BNB and kind of the FDT narrative, okay, I get it. You can't assume those things are true. I could see why you would just stay away from BNB entirely right now, right? Because you can go find anything else to trade. But if you also realize that anything against finance is going to take four or five years

to resolve, and you've just gotten a massive dip and you think this coin is going to continue to exist, well, you just got to dip into oversold on news that gives you a potential opportunity if the chart looks right. Or even if you're holding, a lot of people are holding a lot of BNB out there. And so- I still hold BNB, just to be transparent i still i still hold something yeah yeah so i mean you know you don't want to panic sell at a low there when it could potentially rise higher you can i don't know where i would sell it uh because i don't have access to any uh exchanges would be right at the but yeah okay right right um let me see here and i've got that idea it's very

polarizing we like to be a contentious and controversial here make some waves right um i've also got this uh this chart here this is um usd against the canadian dollar i like it let's get some forex going yeah i mean the one thing i notice here we've got this range uh we've got this huge spike of volume right up here at the top as we're going through the range. And we're just like really pressuring the lows of the pivot here. I believe if we get this breakdown, clean breakdown here, you know, I don't say it can't bounce before. But once we get this clean breakdown, this is about 1. 5, 9. We can get a clean breakdown through that. I mean, there's a high volume node there and everything. I mean, that just, I think you

minimally look down here at the S1 pivot on the weekly. Um, and that, that's a huge bit of move there. That'll get you down around 1.26417 right around there. Um, so this is another one I like, um, again, this is USD against the Canadian um can i ask you a question usd against the canadian dollar yeah so guys obviously that means it's effectively shorting the dollar right saying that the canadian dollar will rise in value against the dollar and for those who don't trade forex the pairs can be back and forth depending on which pair you trade so it can be a bit confusing sometimes when you're shorting you're long the dollar and sometimes when you're shorting you're short the dollar depending on the pair and how it's structured

and traded. But I want to just know how much then when you're looking at a dollar short in theory against a different currency, how much are you looking at in a vacuum and how much are you considering DXY in general, like for dollar strength when you look at those trades? This is a commodity pair. And so Canada gets like, I think it's still like around 25% of its revenue from oil sales. So what you're really looking for here is you're looking for a weak dollar

and strong oil. And that'll get you going there because that- Norway is similar, right? Yeah. I remember trading USD, NOC, or whatever, Norway, and it's kind of very similar. Australianian kind of yeah exactly yeah so as long as you know the the dollar i mean the

oil's been pulling back pretty big for quite a while here uh the dollar itself um you know it's dropping today on you know we're getting ready to listen to a powell later on and the you know the rate uh interest rate decision there. And so I just, I don't have any change on the dollar. I think the dollar continues going lower overall. And I think we'll, may have found a bottom here. So, I mean, you've got two things kind of at work here, but if we lose that low there, I think we're probably headed down there, probably around that S1 pivot on the weekly there. I like it. Maybe we should do the one stock, one crypto, one Forex. But it's funny, you were always a Forex trader before crypto. Do you still talk

about it a ton in the group? You're still- Oh, yeah, yeah. And I've converted. So when we first got the trading group going, everybody was almost 100% crypto. And I said, listen, guys, you can use these same things across other markets. Hey, check out Forex. It was the original D-Gen market, right? 100x leverage, but you need the 100x leverage because the moves are so small relative to crypto, right? Right, right. But yeah, so our group just flourished, man.

Everybody's trading everything now which is fantastic everything from metals to to energy to uh futures to stocks to fx i mean it's just it's been great um and it just and it allows them to move to a different market when it's boring in you know in crypto uh which is you know which is a huge thing so i was muted there for a second. I'm laughing because I was reading the comments and this guy keeps asking when Deaton's coming on. You might want to rewind to the beginning of the video, buddy. We did that for about 40 minutes.

Awesome, Crystal. I know you're sick and I think those are great ideas and I got Twitter spaces in a few minutes. So, man, thank you. That's awesome. Everybody follow TX West Capital. We're playing with the format. As you guys can see here, today we just had

to talk Hinman, obviously, but Chris is going to remain a regular. I can promise you that, man. Thank you so much. All right, man. I'll see you soon. So, guys, I see in the comments over here before I run, Cloud Casino saying, today we have a big court day for Voyager. Judge is supposed to rule for or against the plan administrator today. What a shit show, man. I actually reached out to

the UCC, Jason Raznick from the Voyager UCC, and I just like to ping him with like, hey, dude, we ever getting paid? Are they serious with this 36% thing? But I said, are we getting paid? Like as a joke this morning, and he responded, the creditors keep objecting. We would have last week. It's unreal. The one objecting only has $1,000 there. So the reason apparently, according to the guy from the UCC, that we haven't gotten our money back is because a dude who's got $1,000 on Voyager is objecting. I mean,

God, these systems are so fundamentally broken and disgusting. Today, guys, as I said, we do have Twitter spaces. Today's going to be epic because it's FOMC, so we're just going to run from 10-15 a.m. Eastern Standard Time apparently to 3 or 4 p.m. And we're just going to run from like 10, 15 a.m. Eastern Standard Time, apparently to like 3 or 4 p.m.

And we're going to have our normal crypto town hall. Like I said, 1.5 million people already just from yesterday's. We have a normal town hall. But then moving into the FOMC, we have Norio Rabini joining at 1130. Famed economist, famed Bitcoin hater. Just hates us. So it's going to be a really interesting conversation because if you guys have listened to Spaces, I don't know if I'm allowed to talk to him,

but if I am, it probably won't be that great for us both. So it could get contentious. I don't know if they're going to let us talk crypto with him or not, but it should be very, very, very interesting. And before I go, obviously, guys, OK, X. Oh, OK, X, please sign up. As you can see down below, that says deposit and trade unlock a mystery box rewards of up to $60,000. A lot of money. Of course, we all know that like when you sign up for an exchange and you figure you get $60,000, it's like you need to deposit

$60 million first or something to get get that so don't think that you're gonna go deposit a hundred bucks and get sixty thousand but there are endlessly uh opportunities there for you guys to get money and okx doing exceptionally well fully backed uh really feeling very comfortable there honestly um jewel says i don't like space much can be too tense at times yeah it's easy to say shit when you're not looking someone in the face which is uh what you get with the keyboard warriors on on twitter spaces but i think it's really been great i'm enjoying it and i need to go take like 10 minutes off guys because i'm gonna be there till i don't know uh saturday or something all

right guys i love you thank you so much for tuning in. In general, would love your guys' feedback on what we're doing here. I think you can see that we're working very, very hard to keep up with what's happening on Spaces on YouTube and making the content better, working really, really hard. So I hope you guys can see that and appreciate that. Until tomorrow, see you guys later and see

you on spaces of course peace let's go let's go