Latest / The Paul Barron Crypto Show / Banks in Full-Blown PANIC!🚨CLARITY Week!🚨INTERVIEW Adam Minehardt🔥Hyperliquid

Transcript

Banks in Full-Blown PANIC!🚨CLARITY Week!🚨INTERVIEW Adam Minehardt🔥Hyperliquid · The Paul Barron Crypto Show

0:00
Speaker 1: Banks are in full meltdown, in panic mode. This was
0:03
Speaker 1: a big one today. We'll break it down for you
0:05
Speaker 1: because this week is all about clarity and it's getting
0:08
Speaker 1: very close for sure. I do want to thank our sponsor,
0:11
Speaker 1: and that is Tangent, where you guys can get into
0:13
Speaker 1: self custody. If you're not into self custody yet in
0:16
Speaker 1: your brand new to crypto. There's a lot of new
0:18
Speaker 1: viewers that are coming to our channel right now and
0:21
Speaker 1: maybe you are brand new in the crypto space and
0:24
Speaker 1: you're just getting started. What I employ you to do
0:28
Speaker 1: is get out there and learn a little bit about
0:29
Speaker 1: self custody. Tangum is a great place to start. Get
0:33
Speaker 1: their card which works with your phone. It's a hardware wallet,
0:37
Speaker 1: very easy to set up, so you can actually secure
0:39
Speaker 1: your own assets in self costy. It's one of the
0:41
Speaker 1: greatest things about crypto that's out there. Use our code
0:44
Speaker 1: down below give you a little bit of a discount,
0:46
Speaker 1: and all of the discounts stack on top of it.
0:48
Speaker 1: So whathever they have going on on the website right now,
0:51
Speaker 1: you get that additional ten just by using the PBN code.
0:54
Speaker 1: All right, let's go over and look at it because
0:55
Speaker 1: this was a big deal. On Mother's Day, we had
0:58
Speaker 1: the Clarity Act drop from what was seventy almost eighty percent,
1:03
Speaker 1: falling down here to sixty two percent. Now, the point
1:07
Speaker 1: is is what was going on in the background between
1:10
Speaker 1: the banks and the industry. Now we're going to have
1:12
Speaker 1: an interview today to talk about this that we'll understand this.
1:16
Speaker 1: But this came from Rob Nichols, and you know we've
1:19
Speaker 1: talked about, we've shown some clips of this gentleman, and
1:22
Speaker 1: his statement was this, first off, happy Mother's Day to
1:25
Speaker 1: all the moms receiving the email. I'm sorry to intrude
1:28
Speaker 1: on your Sunday, but I'm going to go ahead and
1:29
Speaker 1: do that anyway. I'm reaching out to make every bank
1:32
Speaker 1: leader in this country aware of the urgent advocacy fight
1:37
Speaker 1: that requires your immediate engagement. As you may be aware,
1:41
Speaker 1: the Senate Banking Committee has been working on a digital
1:45
Speaker 1: asset legislation for several months, and late on Friday, the
1:48
Speaker 1: Committee announced plans to mark up and vote on the
1:52
Speaker 1: Clarity Act this Thursday. So it's basically boiling down. To
1:55
Speaker 1: be clear, we want Congress to put in place digital
1:58
Speaker 1: asset rules in a state ablished responsible guardrails for the
2:01
Speaker 1: crypto industry, and you can kind of see it the
2:04
Speaker 1: last statement there, putting both economic growth and financial stability
2:08
Speaker 1: at risk. This is coming from the banking industry, the
2:12
Speaker 1: American Bankers Association. We need your help to drive this
2:15
Speaker 1: message home before senators consider this legislation. This was a
2:22
Speaker 1: huge statement from the ABA, and then they put it
2:26
Speaker 1: on their website. Look at this, guys, urgent action needed
2:30
Speaker 1: write your senators to ask them to protect lending and
2:32
Speaker 1: local communities by closing the payment of interest loophole to
2:37
Speaker 1: stable coins. That's what is all boiling down to. Not
2:40
Speaker 1: realizing that this is getting ready to get voted on.
2:43
Speaker 1: So we wanted to get an expert on this topic.
2:45
Speaker 1: And joining me now is Adam Mineheart, who is the
2:48
Speaker 1: chief policy officer over at Hyperliquid. How are you, Adam?
2:52
Speaker 2: Very good, Paul, how are you doing? Thanks for having
2:54
Speaker 2: me on.
2:54
Speaker 1: You've bet so last time you were here you were
2:57
Speaker 1: with Chainlink at the time, so to see you're staying
3:00
Speaker 1: in the industry because we need people fighting this fight.
3:03
Speaker 1: So thanks for all you're doing there. Let's get into
3:06
Speaker 1: the I guess the first statement, which is this one
3:09
Speaker 1: week what appears to be a collapse in the banking position,
3:15
Speaker 1: And I asked you this off air, why were they
3:18
Speaker 1: not ready for this? It feels like it's so haphazard.
3:22
Speaker 3: It does, and it's a question I think a lot
3:24
Speaker 3: of us are asking ourselves of how does something get
3:26
Speaker 3: so far along and then one side is so jarred
3:30
Speaker 3: by the results. So the banks have been in the
3:32
Speaker 3: room engaging. I think there's a sense in DC that
3:36
Speaker 3: the banks perhaps did not engage on the substance early
3:40
Speaker 3: enough in the process, and as a result, they lost
3:43
Speaker 3: some trust amongst even some of their own advocates along
3:48
Speaker 3: the way. So I mean Tom Tillis is a pro
3:51
Speaker 3: bank member from North Carolina. Some very large banks are
3:56
Speaker 3: headquartered in the state. Senator Also Brooks too is known
4:00
Speaker 3: for working with the banks as well. So I don't
4:02
Speaker 3: think you could have had a better political setup for
4:06
Speaker 3: the banks to get what they wanted in some sort
4:08
Speaker 3: of agreement. But I think there's this sense that, well,
4:11
Speaker 3: they didn't come to the table with real solutions, and
4:15
Speaker 3: now it's so late in the game that the ship
4:16
Speaker 3: has kind.
4:17
Speaker 2: Of sailed well.
4:19
Speaker 1: And I think the scenario that we're facing right now is,
4:23
Speaker 1: and we'll talk about this, is you know, are there
4:25
Speaker 1: any risk of them actually achieving some sort of penetration
4:29
Speaker 1: into what the Senate is going to be doing. You
4:31
Speaker 1: had Patrick Wit come on, He says, I specifically requested
4:35
Speaker 1: the attendance of mister Nichols. That was the tweet we
4:38
Speaker 1: just showed you guys and other bank trade CEOs in
4:41
Speaker 1: the meeting we hosted back in February, and they refused,
4:45
Speaker 1: And in their defense, I wouldn't want to have to
4:47
Speaker 1: defend their position in public either, So you know, Patrick's
4:51
Speaker 1: kind of making some jabs at them. You've got the
4:53
Speaker 1: industry kind of calling bs on this. And when you
4:57
Speaker 1: look at that, first of all, do you feel that
5:00
Speaker 1: they have enough political ammunition right now to make a
5:05
Speaker 1: dent here? We are three four days away from this
5:08
Speaker 1: going to markup.
5:10
Speaker 3: I say this with all due respect, but at this
5:12
Speaker 3: point I don't think they do. And I'd say one
5:15
Speaker 3: of the key reasons that they don't at this point
5:17
Speaker 3: one is I think there's some frustration with how they've
5:21
Speaker 3: dealt and I think you see that in Patrick Witz's
5:23
Speaker 3: response there. But also there's been some segmentation within the
5:28
Speaker 3: banking lobby. Any bank with retail exposure definitely has a
5:33
Speaker 3: stronger feeling to oppose this language. But there's a lot
5:38
Speaker 3: of banks that don't have as much retail exposure, custodians,
5:43
Speaker 3: investment banks that may actually be for some of this language.
5:47
Speaker 3: So I think you're seeing the coalition kind of break
5:50
Speaker 3: up a little. It's not as monolithic as some expect.
5:55
Speaker 3: But again, the retail banking portion, your community banks, your
5:59
Speaker 3: large gesives with mainly retail operations, I think they're the
6:03
Speaker 3: ones that remain kind of unified here. But the rest
6:07
Speaker 3: I think there's some real uncertainty is whether or not
6:10
Speaker 3: they oppose it, support it, or somewhere in the middle.
6:13
Speaker 1: So there could be a fracture going on here. Maybe
6:16
Speaker 1: that that's very intriguing that you bring that up.
6:19
Speaker 4: Is if you look at some of these go ahead
6:22
Speaker 4: you look at some of these large banking organizations with
6:25
Speaker 4: investment banking interests doing their own blockchain pilots, working with
6:30
Speaker 4: lots of crypt native players.
6:33
Speaker 2: Definitely, if you try to go internally into.
6:35
Speaker 3: A large multinational bank, there's definitely going to be some
6:38
Speaker 3: different priorities depending on where you are in the bank,
6:42
Speaker 3: as opposed to just a retail facing institution that's really
6:46
Speaker 3: about customer deposits.
6:48
Speaker 1: Yeah, I still challenged the idea of customer deposits and
6:52
Speaker 1: loans becoming a risk just because I don't know that
6:56
Speaker 1: the market has been Maybe in ten years, you know,
6:58
Speaker 1: there may be that, But by then I think the
7:00
Speaker 1: banks themselves will have adapted to this next generation of
7:03
Speaker 1: finance and they'll be ready. This was an interesting statement
7:07
Speaker 1: banking groups pushing the last minute changes on the yield
7:09
Speaker 1: compromise because this gets into it in the yield compromise.
7:13
Speaker 1: When you look at this and you also consider the situation,
7:17
Speaker 1: what is the real concern now? Because they have got
7:20
Speaker 1: away with at least what is known as passive yield,
7:24
Speaker 1: which is put money in, don't do anything like a
7:26
Speaker 1: money market. In essence, are what are they so concerned about.
7:33
Speaker 2: The way the language is written.
7:35
Speaker 3: Yes, it does ban yield on passive deposits, but it
7:39
Speaker 3: does create an opening for reward programs, for programs based
7:44
Speaker 3: on transactions. It also kicks the rule making the three agencies,
7:49
Speaker 3: the SEC, CFTC.
7:50
Speaker 2: And Treasury.
7:52
Speaker 3: So these rules are going to be written and lobbied
7:54
Speaker 3: heavily over the course of the next year that potentially
7:58
Speaker 3: this could open up a wider window for some of
8:02
Speaker 3: these crypto firms to be able to pay yield on
8:04
Speaker 3: a broader range of project of products. But I don't
8:09
Speaker 3: if I'm the banks, I got to think that that's
8:11
Speaker 3: a better outcome than the current Genius Act language, which
8:15
Speaker 3: basically gives the exchanges a very wide berth. So I'm
8:19
Speaker 3: not sure about the political calculus, and I think that's
8:21
Speaker 3: what you're seeing in some of these members who are saying,
8:24
Speaker 3: how can't you be like this?
8:25
Speaker 2: We gave you everything you want.
8:27
Speaker 3: There's written language in there banning passive yield, there's all
8:31
Speaker 3: sorts of provisions they asked for studies, anti manipulation provisions, etc.
8:36
Speaker 2: So I think some people are like, what do you want? Now?
8:40
Speaker 3: We're seeing these letters come in which are way more
8:43
Speaker 3: specific than they've ever gotten in the process.
8:46
Speaker 2: So I think there's just overall frustration with them. And
8:49
Speaker 2: I say this as the one that worked for a
8:51
Speaker 2: large bank.
8:52
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, well exactly. I want to play a clip
8:55
Speaker 1: for you because this is far from coinbase talking about
8:58
Speaker 1: this and his analysis, and I want to get your
9:01
Speaker 1: opinion on this. Let's take a look.
9:02
Speaker 3: Yep.
9:03
Speaker 5: Even though there's been a fair amount of press attention,
9:05
Speaker 5: it's all of this has been happening kind of behind
9:07
Speaker 5: closed doors. You know, once you get kind of the big,
9:10
Speaker 5: sort of significant mega players, including the President of the
9:13
Speaker 5: United States, engaged on this, it's going to become really
9:16
Speaker 5: hard for a group like the bankers to come in
9:19
Speaker 5: and more visibly be taking on the administration. I can't
9:23
Speaker 5: think of another industry that has more directly taken the
9:26
Speaker 5: President on on one of his core policy objectives than
9:30
Speaker 5: the bank industry has. Even at a time when they're
9:32
Speaker 5: getting a lot of benefits from the administration, They've been
9:35
Speaker 5: managed to thread the needle pretty well in what they've done.
9:39
Speaker 5: But I imagine at some point the you know, that'll
9:42
Speaker 5: be hard for them to sustain once the President begins
9:44
Speaker 5: to understand what's happening.
9:47
Speaker 1: Well most of the time, I agree with Farre my
9:49
Speaker 1: question because I'm one of those that have seen DC
9:53
Speaker 1: lobbying and it is powerful, And you're talking about the
9:57
Speaker 1: most powerful stepping up to the plate right now, literally
10:00
Speaker 1: the week of all this going to the Senate. Do
10:03
Speaker 1: you think coinbase is being a little naive there? Do
10:05
Speaker 1: you think maybe Farr's onto something and they finally have
10:08
Speaker 1: drawn along a line in the sand.
10:11
Speaker 2: I tend to agree with Farr.
10:14
Speaker 3: I think the banks have chosen to weigh in in
10:17
Speaker 3: a way that that's going to give them a certain
10:22
Speaker 3: amount of traction in different channels. But I think they've
10:26
Speaker 3: made a decision to really go crosswise with the Trump
10:29
Speaker 3: administration on something that I'd put in the president's top
10:33
Speaker 3: ten list of getting things done.
10:35
Speaker 2: So, yes, where I do disagree.
10:38
Speaker 3: So there are other industries that have gotten crosswise on
10:42
Speaker 3: trade policy, on agriculture policy, so I tend to agree
10:46
Speaker 3: that with Farr.
10:47
Speaker 2: Overall, this is a pretty.
10:50
Speaker 3: A pretty unique situation where you have Wall Street really
10:54
Speaker 3: opposing the president on one of his core objectives. Here
10:59
Speaker 3: you don't see it, don't see it often, but you
11:01
Speaker 3: saw the Trump administration on credit card fees as well.
11:04
Speaker 3: I think the populist bent of this administration views banks
11:09
Speaker 3: as a worthy enemy, and I think that's that's the
11:12
Speaker 3: reality that a lot of a lot in the bankings
11:14
Speaker 3: you're facing right now.
11:17
Speaker 1: Yeah, so that's my point. You're talking about the credit
11:20
Speaker 1: card fees because that got pulled out of this last minute,
11:24
Speaker 1: and to your example there that is the ABA at
11:28
Speaker 1: work you know in l since getting administration power implemented
11:34
Speaker 1: into policy pretty easily. Do you think crypto is different
11:38
Speaker 1: or you still feel consistent that this would be different.
11:43
Speaker 2: I still feel like it's different.
11:45
Speaker 3: I think Crypto has risen just so high within the
11:48
Speaker 3: current White House, and I think there's been so much
11:51
Speaker 3: work being put into this, and the President has made
11:54
Speaker 3: so many statements in favor of this and has shown
11:57
Speaker 3: just a general I don't want to say frustration, but
12:01
Speaker 3: a general sort of you know what, we're moving this
12:05
Speaker 3: bill whether without the banking industry. They need to get online.
12:09
Speaker 3: So I think I think crypto is kind of the
12:12
Speaker 3: has kind of caught the spirit of this administration in
12:15
Speaker 3: more ways than one, and the banking industry is just
12:19
Speaker 3: in a really, really tough spot.
12:21
Speaker 1: We are I never thought i'd hear those words coming on.
12:24
Speaker 1: Anybody's out there at a tough spot. Listen, we're gonna
12:27
Speaker 1: find out this week for sure. Adam, you moved over
12:30
Speaker 1: to hyper Liquid as chief Policy offer officer. Tell me
12:35
Speaker 1: a little bit about your new role there and what
12:38
Speaker 1: is like the next thing that hyper Liquid. I mean,
12:42
Speaker 1: when I heard that you were there, I was like,
12:44
Speaker 1: wait a minute, why does hyper liquid need a policy officer?
12:47
Speaker 1: What's going on here?
12:48
Speaker 3: Exactly exactly exactly as you probably know hyper liquid itself,
12:54
Speaker 3: Layer one blockchain.
12:55
Speaker 2: It is offshore.
12:56
Speaker 3: It has captured a lot of training activity and perpetuals,
13:00
Speaker 3: a type of derivative product that does not have an
13:06
Speaker 3: end date for it in terms of trading futures. So
13:09
Speaker 3: it's really caught on and you've seen a lot of
13:12
Speaker 3: this volume move on to the exchange. They're offshore, not
13:16
Speaker 3: unlike many other companies went offshore during the last administration's
13:21
Speaker 3: Enforcement First Agenda. So the mandate really of the hyper
13:25
Speaker 3: Liquid Policy Center is to really begin the policy discussion
13:30
Speaker 3: about how decentralized on chain financial marketplaces can come back onshore.
13:36
Speaker 3: We're very emboldened by CFTC Chairman seligs remarks here on
13:43
Speaker 3: the space regarding perpetuals and regarding on chain decentralized marketplaces
13:48
Speaker 3: about finding a path forward. So that's really the mandate
13:52
Speaker 3: of the Policy Center to really think about these issues
13:56
Speaker 3: that are really core to hyper liquid and the broader
13:59
Speaker 3: ect ecosystem that surrounds them.
14:02
Speaker 5: Now.
14:02
Speaker 2: So it's really been.
14:03
Speaker 3: A big story in the last year or so in
14:06
Speaker 3: terms of volumes moving onto these exchanges.
14:10
Speaker 1: Well, I like the note in the essence of bringing
14:13
Speaker 1: and on shoring a lot of this industry back here
14:16
Speaker 1: to the US, because you're right there, this is an
14:18
Speaker 1: issue that we will be facing if we don't get
14:21
Speaker 1: things underway in terms of a policy side to where
14:24
Speaker 1: these are growing, because the rest of the world has
14:25
Speaker 1: already kind of moved on and they're doing it so.
14:29
Speaker 3: Definitely, and there are innovations happening in the financial markets
14:33
Speaker 3: that are not occurring in the US, and what we
14:36
Speaker 3: want to do is bring these back to the US.
14:38
Speaker 3: There's jobs, there's innovation, there's better consumer access in terms
14:43
Speaker 3: of speed and lower cost products. So that's what we're
14:47
Speaker 3: trying to do. We're hopeful, but first we got to
14:51
Speaker 3: see market structure play out.
14:52
Speaker 1: Yeah, speaking of that, we'll get that in second. And
14:55
Speaker 1: by the way, guys, we are going to do our
14:57
Speaker 1: lightning around without them, so I'll stick around for that.
14:59
Speaker 1: We do it at the end. And those are always
15:01
Speaker 1: fun because I think it gets people to give us
15:04
Speaker 1: some insights to where the market's really heading. Listen, there
15:07
Speaker 1: has been some pushback by a handful of bipartisan positions.
15:12
Speaker 1: One of them was Grassly and this was really floating
15:16
Speaker 1: in the housing issue that of course apparently has been resolved.
15:20
Speaker 1: He seems to be on board now, so that's a
15:22
Speaker 1: big deal. When when you see this, what do you
15:26
Speaker 1: think we could expect in this hearing? Do you think
15:28
Speaker 1: we'll see some crazy stuff coming in from Warren and
15:32
Speaker 1: everyone else.
15:35
Speaker 3: On what you just showed there on the Blockchain Regulatory
15:37
Speaker 3: Certainty Act and the nineteen sixty provisions, very important provisions here.
15:44
Speaker 3: Really the core here is on developer protections, people who
15:48
Speaker 3: design these blockchains and these DeFi protocols that consumers are using.
15:54
Speaker 3: The real question here is where's the line drawn for
15:57
Speaker 3: the developers to be criminally responsible for how these are you?
16:01
Speaker 3: So obviously we in the industry feel very strongly that
16:05
Speaker 3: you cannot be prosecuted criminally for a computer code. This
16:10
Speaker 3: has become a lightning issue on the Hill, and for me,
16:14
Speaker 3: outside of ethics and maybe NOMS, I would say this
16:18
Speaker 3: issue is really the determining factor for whether or not
16:21
Speaker 3: Democrats will ultimately support here. I think what's interesting about
16:25
Speaker 3: this agreement is it's between two Republicans.
16:28
Speaker 2: It's between Cynthia.
16:29
Speaker 3: Lummis, the core author of this bill, and Chuck Grassley,
16:34
Speaker 3: who's not even on the Banking Committee but has jurisdiction
16:37
Speaker 3: as the chairman of the Judiciary Committee. Over some of
16:40
Speaker 3: these criminal statutes. They've reached an agreement. What it doesn't
16:45
Speaker 3: say is how Democrats feel about it. And we've had
16:47
Speaker 3: two key senators on the Banking Committee, Senator Cortes Mastro
16:53
Speaker 3: and Senator Mark Warner, who are very concerned with these provisions.
16:57
Speaker 3: It's yet to be seen if this agreement will get
17:01
Speaker 3: Democrats on, but if they're not happy with that language,
17:05
Speaker 3: it could be a real barrier to getting some Democrats
17:08
Speaker 3: on this bill, which I got to tell you, having
17:11
Speaker 3: Democrats on this bill is really really important at this moment.
17:14
Speaker 1: Yeah, so you do you don't think that Grassley's move
17:18
Speaker 1: also could possibly put Cortes maybe going in this direction
17:23
Speaker 1: as well.
17:24
Speaker 2: It definitely could.
17:26
Speaker 3: And I think right now in our little pocket of
17:29
Speaker 3: this world in the crypto world is following market structure.
17:31
Speaker 3: That question that you just said is really critical, and
17:35
Speaker 3: I think right now we just don't know how.
17:38
Speaker 2: Democrats are going to feel about this new language.
17:40
Speaker 3: It was just announced, I think fifteen minutes ago, so
17:44
Speaker 3: a lot of people are digesting this.
17:45
Speaker 2: But that's that is a key question.
17:47
Speaker 5: Here.
17:48
Speaker 1: Here's a kind of a lay of the land on
17:52
Speaker 1: the Senate Banking Committee, and to your point, right there,
17:56
Speaker 1: a lot of these were no's on SAB one twenty one.
18:00
Speaker 1: Look at that there. Of course is Catherine Cortez Mastro
18:05
Speaker 1: right there, coming out of Vegas or Nevada, and she's
18:10
Speaker 1: one that I think would be needing to get into
18:13
Speaker 1: that position. Of course, Ruben Diego's in here. You've got
18:17
Speaker 1: Andy Kim, Raphael Warnock, Lisa Blunt Rochester, Mark Warner, and
18:22
Speaker 1: then of course Senator also Brooks, who's been around this.
18:25
Speaker 1: So if these senators are in your area, guys, you
18:29
Speaker 1: might want to maybe voice your opinion.
18:31
Speaker 2: Be a good time, definitely, And yeah, it's a great graphic.
18:36
Speaker 3: I think our friends at Galaxy did that, and I
18:38
Speaker 3: think we are looking at folks to reach out to
18:41
Speaker 3: these members weigh in when they can. It really is
18:44
Speaker 3: those seven members in play. I think there's certainly a
18:50
Speaker 3: ranking here of who's most likely to support to least likely.
18:53
Speaker 2: Amongst those seven.
18:55
Speaker 3: I think one thing we're also looking for is Senator Schumer.
18:59
Speaker 3: He has the ability to really hold those seven together
19:03
Speaker 3: or let them vote how they want to vote. So
19:05
Speaker 3: we're also looking for signals out of mister Schumer's office
19:10
Speaker 3: on whether or not he's going to say, look, guys,
19:12
Speaker 3: you got to stay together. We saw what happened on Genius.
19:15
Speaker 3: Once you have even one democrat get on board, it
19:19
Speaker 3: just negates your ability to really negotiate and strength. So
19:25
Speaker 3: we're watching, we're in the window.
19:27
Speaker 1: So you feel like right now the well, what's your anticipation,
19:32
Speaker 1: you know, do you feel like we're going to see
19:33
Speaker 1: a major pushback or do you think it would be
19:36
Speaker 1: the normal? You know, I would say I wouldn't say
19:41
Speaker 1: I'm the facade, but a lot of times many of
19:43
Speaker 1: these objections and amendments are a facade just to get
19:47
Speaker 1: another deals done. You know that they're trying to work
19:50
Speaker 1: over here. I'm gonna throw an amendment up, but if
19:53
Speaker 1: you let me do something over here, I'll drop that amendment.
19:55
Speaker 1: You know. So what do you think is going to
19:58
Speaker 1: happen this week?
19:59
Speaker 2: During this right right now?
20:01
Speaker 3: I agree with your point there, right now, this is
20:05
Speaker 3: posturing to see how much changes in language Democrats can
20:10
Speaker 3: extract from Republicans at this last moment. A lot of
20:13
Speaker 3: these really important deals come together in these last couple
20:17
Speaker 3: of moments. It's a little bit dangerous because there's not
20:22
Speaker 3: full visibility into what these changes are, and they're usually
20:26
Speaker 3: occurring at such senior levels in the Senate that they
20:30
Speaker 3: just end up.
20:31
Speaker 2: In the bill.
20:32
Speaker 3: So I think right now we're seeing a lot of
20:33
Speaker 3: posturing hopeful to get changes on ethics, nominations, and BRCA
20:40
Speaker 3: from the Democrats perspective, as well as potentially DeFi and
20:43
Speaker 3: section five oh five. So they're really kind of in
20:46
Speaker 3: that window of extracting things out of Republicans and hopefully getting.
20:51
Speaker 2: To a yes.
20:53
Speaker 1: Yeah. Well, and that's the key. Is there any risk
20:56
Speaker 1: of this that would push us to the brink of extension,
21:02
Speaker 1: that could really risk a time issue in terms of
21:06
Speaker 1: being just out of time?
21:08
Speaker 3: Yeah, So for me, I take I probably I take
21:14
Speaker 3: a very different view of time here. I worked down
21:17
Speaker 3: the hill for seventeen years. To me, the clock really
21:21
Speaker 3: runs out September thirtieth, when Congress leaves likely to go
21:27
Speaker 3: campaigning in October for the November elections. I think there's
21:31
Speaker 3: time in July. I think there's time in September. The
21:35
Speaker 3: deadlines are useful as forcing mechanisms to really get members
21:40
Speaker 3: to kind of come to the table and deal. So
21:44
Speaker 3: you know, people focus a lot on oh, we missed
21:46
Speaker 3: the deadline.
21:46
Speaker 2: We missed the deadline.
21:48
Speaker 3: That's how this works. You have to put a deadline
21:50
Speaker 3: in place to make parties negotiate. It's inching along, So
21:54
Speaker 3: for me, it's end of September. I don't say July.
21:58
Speaker 3: I don't say June. Obviously, the sooner the better. But
22:01
Speaker 3: if you can get Democrats on board, this bill has
22:05
Speaker 3: a chance to go in the distance. If you don't
22:08
Speaker 3: get Democrats on board, this next step, Paul is going
22:11
Speaker 3: to be brutal.
22:12
Speaker 2: On the House floor.
22:13
Speaker 3: You already have an BAG bill, ANAG bill that's partisan,
22:16
Speaker 3: and then you've got a Banking Committee bill that could
22:18
Speaker 3: be partisan. You got to get seven somehow on the
22:22
Speaker 3: Senate floor.
22:23
Speaker 1: Well, I'm glad you're so optimistic. I'm a little bit
22:26
Speaker 1: more less optimistic if we get major you know, issues
22:31
Speaker 1: resulting out of this markup, which you know, my biggest
22:34
Speaker 1: concern right now still, even though I think there will
22:37
Speaker 1: probably be some deals being done, but I still am
22:40
Speaker 1: very concerned about the ethics component of this and where
22:44
Speaker 1: that's really the line in the sand. We had Warren
22:45
Speaker 1: Davidson on not too long ago, and he and I
22:47
Speaker 1: got into it about that very point, and he pretty
22:50
Speaker 1: much agreed that might be the crossing guard that we
22:54
Speaker 1: have to get through to get all this done. Let's
22:57
Speaker 1: go to the lightning on real quick. All right, So
23:01
Speaker 1: banks get called out by Trump in the next three
23:03
Speaker 1: days for overplaying their hand. Do you think he'll bring
23:07
Speaker 1: it up?
23:08
Speaker 2: I do. I'm gonna go with yes.
23:10
Speaker 1: Okay, there you go. I'm in your camp on that one.
23:13
Speaker 1: I think Trump is probably gonna You know, it's like
23:16
Speaker 1: deal closing. You know, you want to do something right
23:19
Speaker 1: at the last minute. That helps, just like bring it
23:21
Speaker 1: across off that will do it. But hey, a big
23:24
Speaker 1: point strategic reserve announcement in a few weeks was, according
23:28
Speaker 1: to Patrick Witt, who's talked about this, do you think
23:32
Speaker 1: that will be a nothing burger? Agree? Disagree?
23:36
Speaker 2: I'm going to disagree here.
23:38
Speaker 3: I think any sort of signal that the US government
23:41
Speaker 3: is still moving along with a strategic reserve here, even
23:45
Speaker 3: if it's maintaining seized assets in an account to hold
23:49
Speaker 3: those positions, I still find that significant. I know a
23:53
Speaker 3: lot of people want this to be much broader for
23:55
Speaker 3: her with open market purchases. But look, if you have
23:58
Speaker 3: a government that seesing assets and agreeing to a policy
24:02
Speaker 3: of holding them to me, I still find that significant.
24:06
Speaker 1: We'll listen, all they'd have to do is go after
24:08
Speaker 1: the Lazarath group. We'd end up holding a lot of
24:10
Speaker 1: bitcoin yep, yeah, and get get over there and get
24:15
Speaker 1: some of the North Korean hackers. The SEC and the
24:18
Speaker 1: CFTC will allow Purpse trading in the US within the
24:21
Speaker 1: next thirty days. This is in reference to some things
24:24
Speaker 1: you're working on. So what do you.
24:25
Speaker 2: Think exactly I'm going to go with.
24:30
Speaker 3: I wish there was a hope, so but I'm going
24:33
Speaker 3: to lean towards I'm going to say maybe not thirty days,
24:37
Speaker 3: but maybe just beyond it. It is something that's really
24:40
Speaker 3: important to bring on shore here. I know the CFTC
24:45
Speaker 3: values that, so I'm going to take a slightly longer
24:47
Speaker 3: view on it given all the other issues on the
24:50
Speaker 3: CFTC's docket. But I would say hopefully within this year.
24:55
Speaker 1: Look at this purpose dex volume. I mean, this is
24:58
Speaker 1: insane that we're going into. So yeah, I agree with you.
25:02
Speaker 1: I would agree with you.
25:03
Speaker 2: It is I mean what people don't talk.
25:05
Speaker 3: I mean PURP sounds confusing, but trading options is really complicated,
25:10
Speaker 3: and when you have a new type of derivative, that
25:14
Speaker 3: makes it much more simpler for people to invest in
25:17
Speaker 3: the Directionality of an underlying commodity. I mean, that's why
25:21
Speaker 3: you're seeing so much volume attracted here. This is an
25:24
Speaker 3: easier and more consumer friendly product.
25:26
Speaker 1: Yeah, for sure, if clarity goes through, occ policy fight
25:30
Speaker 1: will get extra dirty because this is where everything's going
25:33
Speaker 1: to be implemented.
25:35
Speaker 2: I'm gonna go. I'm going to go. Yes here.
25:37
Speaker 3: I think the o CC is a part of DC
25:41
Speaker 3: that kind of flies a little bit under the radar.
25:44
Speaker 3: But with their with their new chartering activity, what they
25:47
Speaker 3: put out in terms of the yield provisions, you're gonna
25:51
Speaker 3: you're gonna have a real disconnect there on yield per se,
25:55
Speaker 3: and they're going to have a lot of work to do.
25:57
Speaker 2: Got to help them.
25:58
Speaker 1: Yeah, Elizabeth Warren will submit one hundred amendments to slow
26:03
Speaker 1: the voting process down.
26:06
Speaker 3: That's a great question. I'm gonna go. I'm gonna go.
26:09
Speaker 3: I'm gonna take the under I'm gonna say.
26:12
Speaker 1: Underlay, I'm gonna go.
26:14
Speaker 3: But totally, I still think she's gonna submit a lot though.
26:19
Speaker 2: I think there's gonna be a lot of amendments.
26:21
Speaker 1: I'm in the middle, but I think she's gonna submit
26:23
Speaker 1: a bunch. We're gonna we're gonna be counting. We should
26:26
Speaker 1: do a drinking test for every amendment we may be
26:29
Speaker 1: falling down. JP Morgan offers to buy out Coinbase after.
26:35
Speaker 2: That is an interesting one.
26:38
Speaker 3: I'm gonna say no. I think if G. P. Morgan
26:41
Speaker 3: was gonna answer the market, they would probably do so
26:44
Speaker 3: organically with their own with their own technology. That's that's
26:48
Speaker 3: my guess. So I'm gonna go with no on that.
26:51
Speaker 1: I'm on the fence just because of the coin Base distribution.
26:54
Speaker 1: It's so immediate, you know, into the market. You go
26:57
Speaker 1: with a brand new product, you got all those cuss
27:00
Speaker 1: troomers over there ready to trade. I don't know everyone
27:02
Speaker 1: will happily use Wells Fargo's deposit token in DeFi.
27:08
Speaker 3: I mean, the combination between Wells Fargo and DeFi and
27:11
Speaker 3: one size is wild.
27:13
Speaker 2: So I'm gonna go with I'm going to go with
27:15
Speaker 2: no on that one.
27:16
Speaker 1: With you.
27:17
Speaker 3: So, I'm not sure if the Wells Fargo account holders
27:22
Speaker 3: is the target audience audience.
27:27
Speaker 1: If they would just call the token far too, that
27:31
Speaker 1: would be perfect. If you get the dejons, people wouldn't
27:35
Speaker 1: really know what it is. They'd probably go into you know,
27:38
Speaker 1: it's crazy, just farto. Well's farto banks will fight to
27:42
Speaker 1: stop the deminimus tax exemption. Do you think that will happen?
27:46
Speaker 3: I think they will, for sure, But I think it's
27:49
Speaker 3: going to be I think it's going to be a
27:50
Speaker 3: really tough hill to climb. We're already seeing strong by
27:54
Speaker 3: bipartisan support on this one, and I think for them,
27:57
Speaker 3: they've already got involved in so many crypto type here
28:00
Speaker 3: that I think is gonna be a heavy left but
28:02
Speaker 3: I think we will lobby against it.
28:03
Speaker 1: Too many black eyes right now, Crypto skyrockets on Friday
28:07
Speaker 1: post the markup. What do you think?
28:09
Speaker 3: Nay, hard to say, skyrocket probably know, but maybe a bump.
28:18
Speaker 2: Yes, I could see that happening.
28:19
Speaker 1: All right, I'm gonna put you kind of in the
28:21
Speaker 1: middle there. I'm with you. I'm kind of in the
28:23
Speaker 1: middle leaning toward no though for all of you guys
28:26
Speaker 1: out there again not financially.
28:29
Speaker 2: It's still such a long process.
28:31
Speaker 1: Well, yeah, that's the thing. This is just a mark up. Okay,
28:33
Speaker 1: that's not passing the Clarity bill. You still got to
28:35
Speaker 1: get through, of course, all of the markups themselves, and
28:39
Speaker 1: then the Senate has to get the votes. Everything's got
28:41
Speaker 1: to be done last minute. You know Hail Mary's will
28:44
Speaker 1: be there for sure, so get ready on all that listen.
28:49
Speaker 1: Thank you so much, Adam. We appreciate you breaking it
28:52
Speaker 1: down for us.
28:53
Speaker 2: It's been definitely Thank you, Paul. Really appreciate you having
28:56
Speaker 2: me on.
29:03
Speaker 1: If you like this video, hit like and subscribe, drop
29:06
Speaker 1: a comment down below, and also join our free private
29:09
Speaker 1: member group the links in the description