TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

It were me, a 100% of my red money would go into jay proof. A 100% of it. You've got a dev sitting here with his face on the screen every day telling you he's never gonna sell a penny and who never has. Who admits to mistakes when they were made like the market maker, Gambling on some shitcoin. Big mistake. Market maker. Gone. Dealt with.

This launch has been disastrous, generating over $1 million in fees while fans were left disappointed. Allegations of insider trading linked to the creator account have surfaced, but the creators deny any wrongdoing. They claim the fees support the project's ongoing operations and cover expenses, including legal fees for establishing a foundation. The project is managed by Hailey Welch, who supposedly owns none of it. The creators argue that their tokenomics are legitimate, despite criticism about the allocation and the potential for insiders to profit at the expense of fans. They insist they are committed to the project's long-term success and reject claims of a rug pull as defamatory.

That this is not a rug pull, that I have 100% control over this supply, that I'm not gonna lock it, that I'm not gonna stake it, that I'm gonna keep my control. And that's why here we are with people panicking, by the way, at a legitimate floor of 50 to $60,000,000 on a meme coin that was launched with a 100% fair stealth launch that nobody knew about until three days later. Do you know what kind of an achievement that is?

Okay, so you're asking if I was part of the Melania launch, and if it was sniped like Trump's? Yes, I was part of it. The team wanted to snipe it because of the Trump situation, but we weren't the big snipers. We didn't make any money from it, and we didn't take any liquidity out – zero. Regarding the wallet traced to the Portnoy situation that received $1,500,000 of Melania token, and then sold, there's a distinction. We didn't swap liquidity, but we did sell liquidations. Those are two different things. So yes, we sold, but we didn't swap.

Speaker explains that a space with Stu Peters, Dan Bilzerian, Joe Os Santos, and Soliman wasn’t held correctly; he regrets not getting their teams up immediately and tried to stay neutral to let Stu have his day in court. He argues Stu’s rapid, ready answers indicate rehearsed responses, noting, "they know all these coins are Ponzi schemes." He calls the space a "kill shot" with evidence of a cash-out scheme: the wallet "8GBZB" shows three team members cashing out, draining liquidity from "J Proof." He identifies "JCJE" as the "donation wallet" and contrasts it with transfers to "AGZB"/"HGZB" that cash out to Coinbase, citing "$77,249.76 withdrawn" (page shown). He repeats, "Here's the donation wallet" and "three different team members are using that wallet and transferring out," calling it "irrefutable proof" and "This is the kill shot," labeling Stu Peters a "scammer" and urging others to "spread the word."

"And from a dev who promised never to sell, which I haven't." "There's a cost to putting a website together." "Who do you think pays for boosts on the Dex screener? That's me." "Those cost anywhere between 1,200 and $5,000." "I did it at least a dozen times." "You know, these things have actual real cost to them." "Along with influencers and from a dev who promised never to sell, which I have."

That this is not a rug pull, that I have 100% control over this supply, that I'm not gonna lock it, that I'm not gonna stake it, that I'm gonna keep my control. And that's why here we are with people panicking, by the way, at a legitimate floor of 50 to $60,000,000 on a meme coin that was launched with a 100% fair stealth launch that nobody knew about until three days later. Do you know what kind of an achievement that is?

"People and to combat the volatility, and it worked." "But also the market maker was there to implement strategies like chart support, marketing, advertising, billboards, building the new LP on pump swap." "Yeah, the market maker made some poor trades." "Lost capital." "At first, it was I was a scammer and I ran off with it until it wasn't that anymore." "And then the market maker burned the exact amount just to make up for it." "So it negated it, including an additional $30,000 buy on the chart for support after AK's original Jewish FUD attack." "To use for payments to creators for content, these videos, the music videos, the memes, really good stuff, deck screener trending 500 x boosts." "And the market maker had plans for a whole lot more." "That was a punch in the balls getting sniped by the arbitrage bot."

It were me, a 100% of my red money would go into jay proof. A 100% of it. You've got a dev sitting here with his face on the screen every day telling you he's never gonna sell a penny and who never has. Who admits to mistakes when they were made like the market maker, Gambling on some shitcoin. Big mistake. Market maker. Gone. Dealt with.

Nobody had advanced knowledge of the launch. I mean, that's what insider trading is. Nobody, absolutely nobody besides myself and Andrew, knew that J Proof was even a thing until after the launch, thereby negating any claims of insider wallets. Anybody can buy these things immediately when they hit the blockchain.

The speaker accuses someone of making antisemitic remarks, including calling Lucas a "foreign born Italian cosplaying as white." They allege this person claims a Jewish network is out to get J Proof and that he's working with Jewish billionaires. The speaker challenges claims about $5,400,000 in a J Proof wallet, stating the actual value is closer to $115,000, and the recent transfer was only a little over a thousand dollars, not $50,000. They accuse the person of lying and initially denying insider trading, then admitting on Stu Peter's network that the market maker wallet made bad trades and gambled on shitcoins. The speaker asserts this person used their platform to promote a meme coin token, breaking promises and Minnesota state law. They claim a class action lawsuit has enough participants to move forward and that blockchain evidence supports their accusations. They also dispute claims that investing in a mystery project will increase liquidity and market cap, arguing that increasing liquidity makes it harder to increase market cap without buy pressure.

It's not just one thing that indicates if the volume is good at a certain point; it's intuition. It's a combination of socials, volume, holders, how many people have left, who's selling, and who's showing it. Wait, is this for real? Let me double-check... President of Europe... but this is old, from last week. Oh, no way! He just launched his stuff? How is this even possible? No, no, no, no, no!

But of all of the red money or crypto or meme coin investments, it's my personal opinion that J proof is the most solid. And all of that, again, the evidence of that is available on the blockchain where you can see what the dead wallet holds, what the dead wallet started with, how I have continued to pour LP rewards back onto the chart, not taking any money for myself. It's not a get rich quick scheme. Never has been. It's a long term play. You should be less concerned about the dollar value of your J proof wallet as you are concerned with the amount of J proof tokens that you are holding.

J Proof is making an investment with the dev wallet to benefit the J Proof community. This investment aims to boost liquidity in J Proof, which will drive up the market cap value. Token holders should see an increase in liquidity over the next 30 to 60 days, as well as a correlated increase in market cap value. The speaker suggests putting all available money into J Proof to maximize holdings.

The speaker is asked about the question of whether Vitalik was wrong in allocating millions of ether to early contributors. The speaker explains that they cannot answer the question due to ongoing administrative matters that they are currently addressing. They mention that they believe the list should have been made public and transparent, but they were overruled. They clarify that none of the ether has been taken out from the Ethereum presale and it's more about transparent governance. The speaker acknowledges the importance of transparency and believes in complete openness.

It were me, a 100% of my red money would go into jay proof. A 100% of it. You've got a dev sitting here with his face on the screen every day telling you he's never gonna sell a penny and who never has. Who admits to mistakes when they were made like the market maker, Gambling on some shitcoin. Big mistake. Market maker. Gone. Dealt with.

Speaker explains that "the space ... wasn't held correctly" and admits, "I screwed up because I should have agreed to get our teams up immediately," opting to "let him have his day in court" and remain neutral. He says, "They know all these coins are Ponzi schemes" and notes that "Stu always had an answer immediately." He calls it "the kill shot" and presents a "cash out wallet, AGBZ. 8GBZB" where "three people on the team [are] cashing out to this wallet." He claims "Here's Stu Peters from the main wallet that he would never sell a penny goes to the side wallet here, AGZB," and identifies "the donation wallet" as "JCJE" while saying "donation wallet" again. He reports "$77,249.76 withdrawn" and says "drain liquidity from J Proof." He asserts "three different team members are using that wallet" and calls it "irrefutable proof" and ends with "Spread the word."

"It's not what this is. We can get into that. But that's what these people did. They bought in at $200,000,000, and now they're freaking out because we're rock solid at, well, now approaching $70,000,000 market cap value. It's a ticking time bomb." They predict: "This is gonna go to billions. The Jews can't fuck with it. The Jeets can't control it. Nobody can control it." "Screen record what I'm saying right now." They add: "They can lie about us. They can talk shit about us. I'm ignoring the noise, and I'm looking at the zoomed out view of this chart."

The live stream has started, albeit 28 minutes late. Updates will be provided as they happen. Judge for yourself what's happening on screen. Amazon stocks were purchased.

The speaker claims that the famous Dow hack was actually an inside job orchestrated by members of the Ethereum Foundation. They suggest that the Bitcoin wallet controlled by the ICO is directly involved and that multiple people must have been part of it. The speaker believes that blockchain analysis can prove this, mentioning a wallet connected to an individual that communicated with the hacker's wallet and another individual setting up the hack. They state that there is more evidence to support their claim.

How do I know if the volume is good enough to route? Honestly, it's intuition. It's a combination of socials, volume, holders, how many people have left, who's selling, and who's showing it. Am I missing anything? This can't be real, let me double check... President of Europe? Wait, this is from an old week though. Oh shit, no way. You just launched this? Wait, wait, wait... Profit! Alright, well, it's right in the stream. We're out! Peace out.

The exchange centers on how the dev wallet supply was acquired. "The dev wallet. The dev wallet's initial acquisition of the supply." There were "combined purchases" that were "over 6,000" and ended up "close to 30,000. 25, 28, 30,000." The purchases required "multiple transfers into the dev wallet" because "my bank account only allows me to like send $5,000 at a time" and "Jewish restrictions are on that." The first three days show "only $6,000 in transactions." "He only put 14,000 initially from his from his Coinbase, and he claimed a 150,000 he's in." "I did it immediately. I did it immediately. I locked up the supply immediately." On evidence, "Have you got evidence that you put in $3,540,000 either via source scan or something else?" and "Where's the evidence that you..."

"that's not enough supply to lock it, so I had to go back and buy more." "There should be your Coinbase going into your dev wallet." "Where's that evidence?" "I'd like to see the evidence that you're in a $150,000, my friend." "I'm into this project for a collective 100 and some odd thousand dollars." "Between buying out of my own pocket, all of the boosts, all of the Dex ads, all of the website stuff." "But I made the dev buy immediately before and after it insta bonded." "So the first buy bonded it, and the second buy was right after it bonded." "I needed another buy to get the 85% that I needed, and that we wanted for the control structure to set all of this up."

When we snipe a coin we launched, it's usually to prevent other snipers from getting in. I don't personally conduct snipes, but the money used is the project's, aimed at deterring others and maintaining the project's viability. For example, Trump coin had enough volume that the snipes didn't matter, but when projects don't have enough volume to deter snipers the project can die quickly. So sniping becomes necessary to protect the project. This is a common conversation in Solana. I think this happens in all meme coins. The public isn't really aware of these behind-the-scenes activities, where projects manipulate their own prices to keep them stable. This is just me being super transparent, maybe it's oversharing.