TruthArchive.ai - Tweets Saved By @MetaMan_X
@MetaMan_X - πππππππ§ π β’
Full Video Brad Garlinghouse At DC Fintech Week ( 23 mins) (for those who haven't seen this) #XRP #XRPCommunity https://t.co/KGsGIk0GoQ
Video Transcript AI Summary
During an interview, Brad Garlinghouse, the CEO of Ripple, discussed the recent SEC case ruling in favor of Ripple and the implications for the cryptocurrency industry. He expressed his belief that the SEC lost on the things that mattered most and questioned whether they would appeal the decision. Garlinghouse also highlighted the need for a constructive dialogue between regulators and the industry, emphasizing the importance of regulatory clarity and legislative solutions. He mentioned that Ripple has seen significant growth outside of the US due to more constructive engagement with regulators in other countries. Garlinghouse expressed optimism about the long-term potential of blockchain technology and called for bipartisan support and regulatory collaboration to ensure the US remains a leader in the crypto space.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Very short this time, but it's always good to be back in Washington.
Speaker 1: You're gonna have to spend any time at the SEC while you're here this time?
Speaker 0: Maybe a photo op? No. Okay. No. No no planned visits to the SCC.
But why would welcome that? I mean, honestly, I think An open dialogue between industry and the SEC would be a step forward from where we
Speaker 1: are now. Well, of course, What we're all referring to, and I think everyone in this room pretty much knows what I'm talking about is the SEC case, which a judge ruled in your favor Around XRP and whether or not it was improperly issued as a security. Are we calling that done and dusted? Are you bracing yourself for some kind of remedy or appeal process?
Speaker 0: Well, look, I think the SEC clearly lost on everything that matters. There is a remedy process which continues forward. There's the unknown, and I know chair Gensler is on stage later. You should ask him if they're gonna appeal. That would be great.
Look, That's not a knowable thing. I I from my point of view, they lost on the things they care most about. But by the same token, if they move the Up the appellate ladder, it becomes more amplified as a decision of consequence. And so it'll be interesting. It's a I think there's a strategic trade off.
I'm sure there's way more lawyers in this room than, I'm comfortable, you know, that you guys know more about it than I do, but I think it's to be determined whether or not I choose to I think regardless of whether they appeal, I feel really good about it. I think it's very clear the SEC now has they lost 3 times with Ripple. They lost, I know the CEO grayscale is on. You know, they lost the grayscale case. And by the way, these are federal judges saying things, I'll I'll quote grayscale.
The judge said that the SEC was being arbitrary and capricious. I mean, this is damning language from a federal judge. Like, you know, I also happen to believe as long as I'm on a roll here. Look, at some point, when you have the same you keep trying to do the same thing, and you keep having the same outcome. At some point, you change your approach.
Well, I hope it would be magical if chair Gensler got up here and said, hey. We're going change our approach. We have lost time and time and time again, so let's re let's step back. Apparently, we haven't had it right because the judicial branch is saying we keep getting it wrong. And so, like, it would be great to have that constructive dialogue.
I would be happy to go to the SCC today. Actually, today would be tough. But Yeah.
Speaker 1: I know you have he has to get on a flight to Dubai in a couple of Or so. We'll pass the message along to chair Gensler when he arrives.
Speaker 0: I would come back from Dubai here to meet with chair Gensler.
Speaker 1: Okay. On the record, he says this. So you mentioned that there was a win in the Ripple case and in the Grayscale case or a loss on the other hand for the SEC. But, of course, those aren't the only high profile cases the SEC is Currently pursuing. They've brought cases against Binance, against Coinbase.
Does the Ripple case teach us anything about what might happen in those cases? How do you view The debate around XRP in the context of those cases.
Speaker 0: Look. I followed the Coinbase case a little more closely, and so maybe, like, I can comment there a little bit more. Look, I I think that the the challenge has been and again, even if you read what the or listen to what the judge has said in some of the early Coinbase, procedural stuff. You know, the SEC is not trending well there. And, again, if at some point, you would think if you keep getting losses, you would say, okay.
Wait a minute. Let's step back. Let's reevaluate. Or even better, Let's be part of championing a legislative solution. Let's not go to Congress and testify and say the laws are clear.
The laws clearly, could be much clearer at a minimum. And, you know, I I think what we're seeing in the Coinbase case, The world is not just a simple Howie test, and we have seen some momentum around legislative solutions. Obviously, washing it's hard to get things passed in Washington. In some ways, that's a good thing. In some ways, that's bad.
But, I'm hopeful that in 2024, we do see some legislative momentum that actually does provide that clarity. And it would be a magical thing if the SEC were part of that working constructively with the industry to find that right path.
Speaker 1: Well, you say you're hopeful that something happens legislatively, but ultimately the way things are going right now. Do you think more clarity is likely to come from Congress, or is it just going to continue to come from the courts and the judicial branch?
Speaker 0: I think that's a question for chair Gensler. I mean, right now, he has taken our approach of your regulation through enforcement. That is not a, in my judgment, constructive way to regulate. Look, one of the things that is most frustrating about this, I mean, Ripple spent well over $150,000,000 defending that case. There is no recourse.
So, you know, the the the case was brought by Bill Hinman and Jay Clayton. Bill Hinman and Jay Clayton left I mean, Jay Clayton left office the next day.
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 0: You know, it just feels a little bit like this wasn't, this was not an, there's just no recourse to the SEC. There's no negative outcome for anyone. And I think it's really, really confusing to me when, you know, Bill Hinman got up to the world in 2018 and said, ETH is not a security. And, you know, now we know from the litigation with Ripple that the the SEC's General counsel even said this is going to make things less clear. This isn't following the Howey test.
So, you know, it just it feels a little bit and I think there should be, you know, some call to accountability, and even investigative work. Like, How do like, why why would we take an approach of putting Ripple on the defense so we gotta spend $150,000,000 to show that the law actually doesn't say what they're saying. And then in another case, say, okay. We think this one's clear. Like, the the the government should not be picking winners and losers.
Speaker 1: So as we talk about this litigation, do you think if there is an appeal in your case or in in one of the other cases we've talked about that ultimately this ends up with the Supreme Court, that This goes all the way to the top.
Speaker 0: I think that definitely could happen. I mean, certainly and we've said this publicly. We are in it till the end.
Speaker 1: So you'd take it to SCOTUS?
Speaker 0: A 100%. By the way, again, there's a lot of lawyers in this room. That is a good thing. I mean, the current Supreme Court, I'd, I would I I we'd love to see the Vegas odds on how that would go.
Speaker 1: They haven't been super friendly to regulators. I think that's
Speaker 0: what you're friendly to regulators. No. And so it like and And that goes back to my earlier point. I don't know if the SCC will choose to appeal this decision. If they do, I think it it risks to them amplifying, you know, something that they're not yet saying, I I think it'd be more constructive for the SEC and even the industry just to say, look.
Okay. Let's step back. Let's reevaluate. As you know, I'm going from here to Dubai. Other regulators around the world like, we we have been in this dialogue.
I've been talking to other regulators around the world for years, and there's an open dialogue. There's a constructive dialogue. The US used to be looked at as a leader from securities regulation and protecting consumers. I think it's become a political liability. The the way the SEC has approached this in the United States, we are looked at here in the US relative to other countries as stuck.
You know, just we we are not leading and even worse, it's just kinda looked at The the other countries are absolutely leading. The UK. I mean, I happen to be going to the UAE later today. But, I could name 5 or 6 countries, Japan, even Australia, Switzerland, Singapore, I mean, these are all countries that are leading and by virtue of that, you're seeing capital investment, You're seeing entrepreneurs set up shop in those countries because the rules are clear.
Speaker 1: I wanna come back to that rest of the world versus the US point, but just To clarify something quickly, because you just said you'll take it to the Supreme Court if you have to. You will ride this out, fight it in the court until it is done if the SEC appeals. There's no chance that you would end up settling in some way.
Speaker 0: Well, that's a slightly different question. I mean, look, Like, I I we've talked a little bit about this publicly now. I was offered the ability to settle prior to you know, they didn't just sue Ripple. They sued me.
Speaker 1: Yes.
Speaker 0: And they sued Dropped that
Speaker 1: now, right?
Speaker 0: That has all been, all dropped with prejudice. And so, you know, like, that feels really good, asterisk. It feels like, how did we end up here? Like, what you sued me as if it was clear I had to knowingly sell know that XRP is a security and act recklessly to not know and people here in the law, like, know more about it than I do. But, like, there was no chance they were gonna win that.
And they're pushing it the way they did. It just feels like the SEC should be part of the solution. Other countries, it's no problem, and you joke I mean, I think you were joking to my meeting with the SEC today. In another country, that wouldn't I've met with central banks. I've met with, I mean, you you name the regulator, and it's kinda like, yeah.
No problem. Open meeting, Open dialogue. We talk about what Ripple's doing. We talk about our view on the crypto industry. No problem.
Here in the US, it's like, you know, it's like, oh, the laws are clear, but yet we can't answer is Ether security.
Speaker 1: Yeah. That's something that the chairman has still not Actually,
Speaker 0: expressed your opinion on Ask him again today.
Speaker 1: Maybe I'll find him behind the curtain somewhere. I'll let you know. Okay. So let's go back to the US, the rest of the world topic as you were just discussing it there. Where do you think the best example is being set?
What should the US be trying To replicate, or does the US just need to be doing something different but taking that regulatory approach differently?
Speaker 0: I like, I I partly because they're, you know, a close economic and political partners to the US, United Kingdom. The UK, I think, has been very constructive on crypto and that, you know, when I say that, it they're not you You know, again, Jared Gensler likes to talk about crypto's the Wild West. It is absolutely not the Wild West. You know, Ripple's a regulated company in many jurisdictions around the world. Against the sing in Singapore, we have our, license from MAS as a major payments provider.
In the UK, we have well, in in Dubai, we've applied for the virtual asset regulatory I can't BARRA. I can't remember what the a stands for. But, you know, it's not the wild west, and I think it's it's a narrative to promote, I guess, a political agenda as opposed to sound policy. And, you know, I think there's still time for the US to remain a key leader in this space, and some of the most important crypto companies in the world are based here in the United States. But, you know, if you if Brian Armstrong were up here today, I mean, I think he would say as well.
You know? May does he wish he had gone public in a different jurisdiction in the United States? And the SEC approved his s one, but then sued him for doing things they knew he was doing. How does that make sense?
Speaker 1: Okay. So you just said you think there is still time for the US to be a leader. How much time is still time? Yeah. Where in the hourglass As are we.
Speaker 0: Well, I mean, look, I wanna be realistic about this. The United States is, what, 23% of global GDP. If the US gets its act together years from now, it probably it's such an important economic actor that it it feels like that option always exists because where of where the US stands in A global GDP per point of view. And it was really the the finance capital of the world. But there are other finance capitals of the world.
And certainly Dubai is, you know, trying to emerge even more so. Singapore for sure. London for sure. And not surprising me. I you know, I've said publicly, 80% of Ripple's hiring this year will be outside the United States.
And it's probably why would I wanna hire more and more people in the United States when the US is making it hostile for me to operate here? And even with the SEC case, I mean, we have US banks as customers. And, you know, I've talked to them post the SEC case, and I'd say, you know, okay. So great. Now we can we have a product called On Demand Liquidity which uses XRP.
And so I go to those banks and say, you know, should we engage on that topic? And they're like, look. Even though you won the case, The United States government is still hostile towards crypto. The OCC is hostile towards crypto. And until that changes, the banks of the United States are not going to engage meaningfully.
So I don't think the window has passed for the US to be a leader, but I think, every day that goes by, these other markets They want the entrepreneurs there. They want growth. And, you know, again, I'm mentioning Singapore, London, and Dubai as three key examples. But I mean, the Ripple's London office is our 2nd largest office.
Speaker 1: Well, that's a really good point. And to your point of you're hiring a lot internationally, these are long term Decisions you're making, these are long term investments. So even if things were to get friendlier in the US, would you all of a sudden shift Shipped back here. How are you thinking about the long term for Ripple?
Speaker 0: Well, like, I mean, a majority of our employees are still op fest based. I think eventually, if if you zoom out far enough, you know, none of this stuff barely existed 10 or 12 years ago. Fair. So if you zoom out far enough, do I think 10 years from now, the US is gonna figure this out and have a constructive regulatory framework for crypto? A 1000%.
Yeah. So that's 10 years. Okay. About 5. You know, I I don't know where I would go as we rewind, but I remain a long term optimist.
In I I was in Silicon Valley for about 25 years. I moved last or a couple years ago. But Better technologies almost always win in the end. And I truly believe blockchain technologies are a path to reducing friction for financial transactions to the benefit of many industries. And the irony, and you and I were talking about this backstage a little bit, for some reason, crypto has become a little bit Partisan issue.
I when I first came to Washington, and as Chris said, I've been coming here 4 or 5 years, it was a totally bipartisan issue. And for some reason recently, it's come a little bit partisan towards Republicans being more open and constructive saying, okay, let's pass this legislation. I the the irony to me around that is one of the core benefits around crypto, particularly around payments, Our customers who are can least afford the cost of remittances are actually burdened the most. So I'm I'm talking about, immigrant population is sending, you know, 1,000,000, 1,000,000,000 of dollars into other countries. And they're paying, you know, the World Bank would say 600 to 700 basis points.
That's outrageous. You know, it, again so for for me, it's surprising that it is not, more bipartisan and that we would have seen kind of Something passed already. But again, as I I think there's still hope and I think now that we have a speaker of the house, maybe we'll make progress.
Speaker 1: Maybe. They have to figure out, you know, how to fund the government in the next 9 days, as well. So they have quite a lot that they're dealing with. But To your point, if it doesn't happen this congress with this lead of the House Financial Services Committee obviously, they passed a few bills, out of committee stablecoin legislation and market structure bill as well. If they can't get it done before the next election, What does that mean?
Speaker 0: I I I don't really know. What I mean by that is I don't know that the, the presidential politics. I haven't heard either of Biden or Trump really speak about this. I mean, I think Trump once tweeted about Bitcoin or something years ago.
Speaker 1: He would true social it now.
Speaker 0: Yeah. That's right. Sorry. Yes. But so I I don't I don't really have an opinion on that.
I I view this as a bipartisan issue. It's good for the United states to have constructive engagement with next generational exponential technologies that truly can have dramatically positive impacts on our economy. It's to the benefit of citizens. And, you know, the US if you go back in the history books, You know, the fact that the US passed clear legislative solutions around the internet in the late nineties Allowed massive amounts of capital and entrepreneurs when you think about it, like, I think we're hosted by AWS here. The largest, most important Internet companies are based in the United States.
The the geopolitical benefit to the United States, not just economic, has been massive because we created the right environment for entrepreneurs and capital to flow into a next generational technology framework. Blockchain is a next generational technology framework. It is going to touch many, many industries. I would agree with people who say, well, right now, there's too much speculation. I agree.
We need more clear, constructive uses of these technologies to solve industry problems. But you're seeing more and more companies doing that, and you're seeing more and more traction. The United States should get behind that. We want these technologies to emanate here. We want to be to have that.
And for whatever reasons, you know, I I think the SEC is part of the problem there. You know, we have, been hostile.
Speaker 1: What you hear and you talk about how this is becoming somewhat of a partisan issue. I've spoken with a lot of Democratic lawmakers, crypto skeptics about this, and they Cite fraud often. A lot of people are defrauded through crypto scams. Also, things the questioning whether or not blockchain ultimately really does anything new that can't be done Already, that it's just trying to recreate something for no good reason, and potentially bad things come with it. How much more work needs to be done to push back against That kind of narrative.
Speaker 0: Well, I mean, the the fraud point, you know and again, you and I talked a little bit about this backstage. You know, the FTX fraud. Mhmm. Wasn't a crypto fraud. I mean, yes, it was it was a it was a fraud.
I I don't know. Like, It absolutely it wasn't unique that this happened to crypto. There's other frauds that in some cases are even a bigger scale than, from there. So when I I hear people say, well, we need legislative solutions around, to prevent FTX, it's like, well, maybe if Gary Gensler and the SCC weren't so focused on going after Ripple and meeting openly with Sam Bankman Fried. Maybe we could have actually avoided some of that.
Right? I I don't I don't know. You know, Gensler won't comment on his meetings he had with SBF, so I don't Really know what that's all about, but it it strikes me those aren't the laws we need to clarify. Fraud laws are there, and there's many jurisdictions. You have, Chair Benham from the CFTC, there's I mean, there's lots of ways you can address that.
And obviously, Sam Bagenfried, I think, is probably gonna Go to jail. I know the sentencing hasn't happened. Yep.
Speaker 1: But guilty on all 7 counts.
Speaker 0: Correct. So I I don't think that's The core of the problem. I I think but to the other part of your problem, like the people who say there's not enough real utility, I mean, look, I kind of agree with that. There's a lot of excitement, and there should be. But that also is true in the earliest days of the Internet.
There are a lot there's a a a birth, just an explosion of entrepreneurial activity that did result in a .com bust, but then you still have emerged from that Google and Amazon and Fate Meta. You know, like, There's no doubt in my mind these technologies, because they actually can be used to rewire how transactions happen. There's immense friction in how cross border payments happen, where Ripple's focused. But there's immense friction in real estate, in bond settlement. There's a way to use these use these technologies.
And by the way, I use those examples as aren't things Ripple's doing, but just it's more advocating for the industry at large.
Speaker 1: Well, let's talk about Ripple, though, and the utility there. What's institutional adoption looking like
Speaker 0: for you? United States, it's been great. I mean, look. We we I'm sensing a theme here. I mean, I was it was a dark time.
When Ripple got sued December 22, 2020, q one of 2021, you know, we didn't know it was gonna happen. Outside of the United States, regulators are like, we don't Understand what the s e c is doing, and we continue to I mean, 2021 and 2022 is some of our best years ever. Grow and we the primary measure we use to measure growth is around Payment volume. We went from doing tens of 1,000,000 to 100 of 1,000,000,000 to 1,000,000,000 of dollars of transactions at a time when we're in the middle of this massive lawsuit with the s e c. So, other countries, again, have engaged constructively.
They see how these technologies can be used to improve payment flows. They see how cross border settlement works today. It's slow. It's expensive. I mean, actually, the the, head of the Italian Central bank, I'm forgetting his name right now.
He just wrote an opinion piece in the Financial Times about how broken cross border payments are. It's 2023 And, you know, these are technologies that actually the US is is trying to stymie. It doesn't make sense. So I
Speaker 1: know you always would rather focus on XRP utility rather than speculation, but do you have a thought on I believe it's been bit up 30% in the last month.
Speaker 0: Crypto overall has been up. I mean, Bitcoin hit a low of, I think, 16 or 17,000. Now it's, I think, at 35,000. XRP definitely has been on a rally. You know, like, if if I had a magical window into what drives crypto prices, I probably would quit this job and just go do that.
So, you know, like, I take a very long view. The big picture on these technologies and and by I'm very much a multi chain viewpoint. Like, Yes. XRP is extremely good at some use cases and payments is clearly one. But I think there are lots of other, blockchains that can be used for other purposes that it's not gonna be 1, you know, kind of 1 winner to take it all.
Speaker 1: Marty bracing myself for when I go check Twitter after this to see everything the XRP army had to say about this conversation.
Speaker 0: There is a passionate advocate group and You
Speaker 1: could say that. Yes.
Speaker 0: Look, I I I think that is a good thing. There's obviously a very passionate advocate group around Bitcoin. I will say, and I I say this to anyone who will listen, like, The ideologues and the kind of, the maximalism that happens in crypto, I think, is counterproductive to crypto. And when I see people advocating, they're like, it's all Bitcoin or it's all XRP or something. I'm just like, no, it's not.
And I I I think we all have to come together. And Frankly, one of the silver linings of the ripple case with the SCC has been the industry realizing, like, this was important for the industry. Yes. It was great for Ripple, and frankly, it was nice for Brad Garlinghouse to have the case dropped. But, like, it was important for the industry and the grayscale decision.
I think it's incredibly important for the whole industry to come together or and agree on things here in Washington to to catalyze that legislative solution that we haven't yet seen.
Speaker 1: Alright. We're gonna have to leave it on that note. Brad Garlinghouse, the CEO of Ripple. Thank you
Speaker 0: Thank you.
Speaker 1: So much. And with that, I have some words To say, we're going to turn to another regulatory conversation focused on a very different angle, and that would be from the CFTC. So for that, I'd like to welcome Chris back to the stage. He's gonna be joined by the CFTC
Speaker 0: chair, Ross
@MetaMan_X - MetaMan X β’οΈ
@AltcoinDailyio β I can attest that J.P. Morgan uh was there uh right from the start uh right before uh public main net was even launchedβ¦β #ETHGATE https://t.co/2bDusdxwGJ
Video Transcript AI Summary
JPMorgan has been a prominent part of the Ethereum ecosystem since its inception, even before the public main net was launched.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The consensus has been, very prominent since the start of the Ethereum ecosystem. I I can attest that JPMorgan was there, right from the start before public main net was even launched.
@MetaMan_X - MetaMan X β’οΈ
@CensoredMen Past meets presentβ¦ two wrongs donβt make a rightβ¦ https://t.co/K5sZZVMgKL
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker is asked if their organization will engage in peace talks with the Israelis. They respond by saying that they don't view it as peace talks, but rather as capitulation or surrender. They question who they would even talk to, suggesting that it would be a conversation between the oppressor and the oppressed. They argue that talking without the presence of weapons is still not enough because they have never seen a successful conversation between a colonizer and a national liberation movement. They emphasize the importance of their struggle for dignity, respect, and human rights.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Won't your organization engage in peace talks with the Israelis? You don't mean exactly peace talks. You mean capitulation, surrendering. Why not just talk? Talk to whom?
Talk to the Israeli leaders. That kind of conversation between the sword and the neck, you mean? Well, if there were no swords and no guns in the room, you could still talk. No. I haven't been I had never seen Any talk between a colonialist case and a national liberation movement to us, to liberate our country, To have dignity, to have respect, to have our mere human rights is something as essential as life itself.