Bitcoin Veterans
Bitcoin Veterans SITREP: Kamala Harris, Misinformation, and Bitcoin with Greg Foss, Joe Carlasare and more
In this episode of the Bitcoin Veteran Spaces, host Coleman dives into the latest happenings in the world of Bitcoin and beyond. Recorded on Tuesday, September 17th, the discussion kicks off with the current Bitcoin price fluctuations and the implications of recent news, including Israel's controversial hacking of Hezbollah's communication devices.
The episode features a special guest, Greg Foss, who shares his insights on MicroStrategy's latest convertible debt offering and the broader implications for Bitcoin adoption among corporations. The panel also addresses rumors surrounding Coinbase and ETF IOUs, emphasizing the importance of transparency in the crypto space.
Timestamps:
00:00:05 - Introduction
00:00:16 - Bitcoin Price Update
00:01:01 - Show Purpose: Defending Values
00:02:26 - Israel-Hezbollah Pager Incident
00:03:48 - MicroStrategy Offering Insights
00:04:54 - Coinbase IOU Rumors Discussion
00:06:12 - Greg Foss on Convertible Debt
00:12:00 - Corporate Bitcoin Adoption
00:15:00 - Saylor's Strategy Overview
00:17:02 - Kamala Harris's Economic Policy
00:25:00 - Harris's Opportunity Economy Plan
00:34:09 - Hillary Clinton on Misinformation
00:35:43 - Censorship and Free Speech Discussion
00:41:47 - Harris's Policies and Immigration
00:45:09 - Critique of Harris's Economic Plan
00:50:26 - Trump's Crypto Token Launch
00:53:13 - Conclusion and Final Thoughts
Sponsors:
Follow Bitcoin Veterans on Twitter Spotify Apple YouTube
Follow the Guys
- Broadcast on:
- 17 Sep 2024
- Audio Format:
- other
[Music] Good morning, everybody. And man, that song always gets me pumped up in the morning. And thank you all for tuning in. Today is Tuesday, September 17th. And this is episode 21 of the Bitcoin Veteran Spaces. My name is Colin, and I am your host. And I want to welcome Terrence on stage. Good morning, sir. How's it going, Coleman? What's the good news today? We barely touched 59, and then we're back at 58K. So 58K forever is still the meme and going hard. And good morning, Bob Van Kirk. Uppercase Terrence is seeing the audience, AC, Hunter, Wade. Good morning, everybody. Good morning. Looks like you lost one of your flags. What happened? You used to be flag flag tea. Now you're flag tear. He's the only feeling half as patriotic. Well, everyone's still getting on the panel, getting all that morning gunk out of your eyes and filling up your coffee. Just want to make sure everybody understands what the purpose of this show is and what we're doing here. And it's to defend the values that our nation was founded upon. And we want to make sure we champion decentralized, trustless systems that empower individuals, communities, and small businesses and eliminate any central authority so we can advance our cause for a free and open society. And we're definitely going to be talking today about the importance of speech. We're going to make this happen by harnessing the power of Bitcoin and promoting a world where every individual has the undeniable right to control their own destinies, their own assets, and their own privacy. We do not support tyranny in any of its forms, Hillary Clinton. And we will use our combined experience and passion to ensure the promise of liberty thrives. And together, we will continue our oaths to safeguard the ideals that define us. We are veterans. We are Bitcoiners. And we are for freedom. And if you are a veteran listening to this, please reach out to us. We'll get you connected with one of our community members. We have over 600 vets and we're growing strong. So please make sure to reach out to us. And just some quick breaking news I just saw. It looks like Israel has been able to hack the pagers of Hezbollah. I just threw it up in the nest and they're causing them to explode. So there's a huge public health warning in Lebanon. I guess there's already been over 70 injuries. So pretty crazy way to start the morning. How do you hack a pager and make it explode? Like what in the pager can you mean like the battery just heats up? I would assume that would be the only way, right? Unless this is like a 10 movement or 10 3D chess move that you just had a way to go ahead and implement an explosive device in every single electronic device. But I would assume that it's something to do with the battery. This is well over my pay grade. So I'm not exactly sure how it works. I'm sure there's somebody listening today that has a better understanding, but very alarming that they can do this. This is why I don't wear my ledger around my neck. I don't want any crypto bros to hack that and have it explode in my face. Yep. And then you're done because I'm sure you keep your seed phrase in your pocket as well on paper. Yeah, I'm a post it on the fridge so I can memorize those words. Yeah, and I do appreciate you sending me that Terence. I'm trying to memorize them today. I want to definitely give a shout out to Greg Foss in the audience. Good morning, sir. I'm so happy that you're joining this space. And if you get a chance, I'd really appreciate it if you can hop on here. I do have some questions for you about the micro strategy offering that they're putting out. And if you've heard me talk about macro and these dealings, you definitely don't want to hear my breakdown of it. So if you could, we'd love to hear your thoughts. So moving forward, I definitely want to try and nip this one in the butt right now. There's a lot of rumors circulating with Coinbase, how they are writing IOUs for the ETFs, Black Rock Fidelity, and that they're suppressing the price and anybody up here that can speak on that. I don't think it's true. I don't think that there's any decisiveness or deviousness going on with them. But I definitely get the panel spots on that. I just shared, let's see to go up something in the nest from Joe Carlosari, which I think is pretty good for everyone to read, which I tend to agree with. I don't think anything's going on there. There's too many eyes on it. And he lays out what would have to happen for the rumors to be true. Yes, and those actually the notes I had to counter it. So it's funny that you put that up there, Terrence. But yeah, so anyone who can't see what's going on, they're just listening in the background. Joe Carlosari said, "For the IOU rumors of Coinbase to be true, it means that there is a vast conspiracy of civil fraud involving no fewer than four law firms, two accounting firms, an auditor, and a Coinbase personal, and Black Rock and Fidelity, etc, etc." So, Joe Carlosari says, "It's fun, which I tend to believe." I don't know why we're talking when Greg is up here now. Yes, I just want to ask Greg, what are your thoughts on that, sir? Hi, guys. I have about 10 minutes, so forgive me if I have to jump. But my thoughts on whether Black Rock IOU use from Coinbase? Yes, sir. I would be extremely surprised why would anybody risk the integrity of all the other business that Black Rock does with that type of shenanigans. So I tend to think that it might be just fun and no basis. People frustrated with the fact that Bitcoin seems stuck in a range, but can I address the issue of the MicroStrategy convert that deal? Okay, so as always, Michael Saylor is Arbing Wall Street, which I perhaps not Arbing Wall Street, taking advantage of arbitrage opportunities presented by Wall Street. And what a convert debt issue is. People need to understand. It's essentially an equity offering with optionality and a strike price, but it is being used to retire a senior debt issue with a six and one-eighth coupon. So he'll pay, I haven't looked at the retirement price if there's a premium if he has to pay one-half the coupon. So 103 and change to retire the bonds, the senior bonds are not. But nonetheless, he's going to retire a six and one-eighth coupon and issue new debt, convertible debt though, with close to a zero percent interest rate. And why do people buy convertible debt with a zero percent coupon? The convert our desks use it as buying volatility. So the convert our desks can in fact purchase the convertible debt, no the strike price, and then play the options market and perhaps sell what they view as expensive call or put options that are presented in the market. And MicroStrategies option ladder is fairly active. It wouldn't surprise me if some of the vols are extremely high, which means when you sell high volatility, you're selling something that is a high premium and you're hedged by owning the convert debt. So you see how basically it's a win-win scenario for MicroStrategies as well as the convertible art desk and the people that pay the options premiums are perhaps happy as well because it means more liquidity in the options chain. But what it also means is that things are capped and it becomes time decay. So it's a very sophisticated game, the convertible art desk, a very sophisticated game. And basically as I've posted, it's a vol arbitrage, are being vol and Mr. Saylor has proven that he's a wizard at doing that. The demand is there in the market. And when the ducks are quacking, you feed the ducks. That's it. So far, thank you for that explanation. What, why do you think the other companies are just so hesitant about doing it if they, if they can see that the man that Saylor is generating from this? You know, it's convertible debt is a special tool. They can backfire in the event of a distressed, the stock doesn't rally, but it turns around and goes in the other direction. That debt becomes a bit of an anvil in the capital structure of a company. And you just have to be careful that you're not overweighting a particular part of your capital structure. So other companies may not even issue public debt. They may use bank lines and fund themselves through the bank markets as opposed to issuing senior debt at term financing with the public markets. That's the first step. And then the second step is to consider a convertible debt issue. I think you're asking me why they don't do it to purchase Bitcoin. And I would just throw out that many companies haven't even cleared that hurdle yet that they want to purchase Bitcoin, let alone what, what tool they would use to fund it. So Michael Saylor is a one of a kind, we know that, and he is taking advantage of opportunities in the market that know, you know, regular chairman or other CEOs just are not interested in or not even don't even understand nearly as fully as he does. Hey, Greg, it's good to see you back. I think, well, I was going to ask you a question. I mean, don't you think that some of these companies, I mean, they're going to dip their toe in the water. They're not going to go full reserve Bitcoin for their treasury. Yes, potentially, you know, you'd like to think so, but it's much like the individual, you know, how many people do you know that don't own Bitcoin. Well, there's equally as many companies, if not more, that won't own Bitcoin as a percentage, because, you know, you have to report to a board. It's viewed as risky. There's career risk involved, probably. So all of these things, Mr. Saylor has cleared, and I would just say that he's in a very unique position. It would be nice to think that other companies are going to put Bitcoin on their balance sheet and certainly over 100 other companies have done so. But how many would use the convertible debt market? Just a small fraction of that would be my opinion. And I do think, and correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that this will just become a more widely used play as they see the success of what Saylor is doing. Again, he's been doing it for about four years now or acquiring Bitcoin. And it's still relatively new. Like these larger corporations don't want to just see a four year timeframe. They want to see multiple years. They want to see 10 years of track record. And then also, they're all competitive. So once they start seeing micro strategy start moving through the ranks, because they're so valuable, they're all going to try and start playing the same play. You know, I would hypothesize that many of them might just use the term debt market rather than the convert market, something they're more comfortable with. The convert debt market is it's a special beast. And there's a lot of nuances there. So, you know, one step at a time would be my argument. And yes, he's putting together a playbook at a blueprint for other companies, but don't forget he issued the six and one eighth coupon senior debt note first. That was his first debt offering. The convert are guys tend to like to see where the straight debt will trade in the market on a credit spread basis for them to properly price that could be the convertible debt structure, including the coupon. Don't forget, it's not about the coupon though it's all about the options that are available in the convert are the volatility essentially that you are purchasing and therefore can lay off at other parts of the, in other parts of the market. Yes, thank you, thank you for us. And so, just so everybody's aware, sailors trying to offer 700 million dollars of the senior notes, but of that they're going to use about 500 million to pay off the senior principal notes. And then the remaining 200 million or thereabouts will be used to acquire additional Bitcoin. So one more question if I can for good because I know I asked to hop off soon. So, so far we've seen micro strategy offer these and they've been oversubscribed. And just with this being mainly used to retire other debt, do you think we'll see the same thing. Yeah, you know, Wall Street is pretty good at bringing things that they already know there might have been a reverse inquiry, where a big, a big account. Basically said here's here's a lead order for 100 million at this coupon and this strike price and whatnot. So it could have been a reverse inquiry, but Wall Street's pretty good at bringing issues that they know will clear the market. I think it's, it's very, very gutsy. There's no question. I liked the fact that he started with a, with a senior debt issue, a straight debt issue and wasn't using the, the optionality of the convert, but obviously keep debt has its attractions as well. You know, who, who doesn't get excited about borrowing for next to zero and then being able to put the, put the proceeds into into Bitcoin. And certainly that's a rinse and repeat type of practice that Mr. Saylor's doing. One last question. Perfect. If I may. So, you know, we know that the 1940s act makes it so that if you have more than 40% of equitable securities on your balance sheet that you're an investment company. So it doesn't apply to Bitcoin. At what point do you think these rules get changed, like besides like whether it's the SEC is doing or, or, you know, a new, a new law that's put on the books. Um, I noticed it, Joe, my, my friend in sometimes we butt heads, but that's good. Carlos are he's in the audience. He'd be much better to answer that question than I would. I being Canadian. Certainly I'm not as close to the SEC as many of your listeners are already. And then I don't have any particular insight to the. To the laws and rules and regulations that Joe might have. So maybe as just a question around that that you could answer. Don't you think that this exposure by one company and. Yeah, I guess just a big spot. Bitcoin is something that regulators have to look at. Well, we know what the rewards are. And if Mr. sailors price predictions come true, then he may well be the most valuable company in the S&P 500, but he's not even an S&P 500 company yet. I don't believe. So that being said, you know, you got to look at the other side as well. What if Bitcoin doesn't perform as expected? You know, you have a company whose stock will be under pressure, not just from the convertible Arab guys because don't forget when the stock price goes down. And gets further away from their strike. They have to sell. They have to short common stock against it. It's called a delta hedge. And they have to delta hedge their position. Basically of the convertible Arab excuse me of the convertible debt. So that will that will cause selling pressure and then, you know, you'll get the Cowboys that say, Oh, now it's time to pile on and they'll start shorting stock. When you do these deals, you typically allow for a certain amount of borrow, meaning the shares are freely available to borrow so that you can short them, or the convertible Arab desk can locate shares and short them. And delta hedge their their long position in the convertible debt. So, you know, as things tend to move in ebbs and flows. When it when everybody runs to the other side of the boat, you know, you get you get intense selling pressure and well, you know what that causes so I don't anticipate that. You know, markets move in the direction that caused the most pain to the most people. And right now everybody is very bullish on Bitcoin price, which means that, you know, if that adage is true, that they'll move in the direction that causes the most pain to the most people that might mean that the next move is down. I don't, I think it's this is all noise in terms of long term price projections. But that's why I say you can't predict predict the next $10,000 move in Bitcoin with any high degree of certainty. You know, you can have conviction, but are you certain that it's going to go in that direction. You can say it's highly likely, but nothing is certain. So buyer beware. Thank you for that, boss. I really appreciate that. And again, have a longer time horizon time preference when it comes to Bitcoin. It's not meant to be traded in the short term, unless you want to get robbed. Yeah, I got to jump fellas. You know, thanks for doing what you did. I'm sorry I can't stay longer, but I'm also, you know, a bit of a recovering recovering from certain. Personal injuries, so. Keep up the good work. Just remember that, yeah, low low time preference. I think this will all be noise, but you cannot be certain. You cannot be certain. And even Jeff Booth says, you know, if Bitcoin doesn't become a medium of exchange. The store value argument becomes questionable. So, you know, we got to increase the volatility. Excuse me, the velocity of Bitcoin transactions. And, you know, hopefully in a couple of years, we'll look back on this. And the price moves will be $100,000 price moves, not $10,000 price moves. Thanks very much for having me. Thanks, Greg. We'll see you tomorrow. Same time. Thank you, sir. Yeah, thanks. I can't commit to that, but I applied you guys. Educational efforts. Thanks a lot. Thank you, sir. And we wish you the best. Welcome up. Sorry, Bob. I didn't welcome you up to the panel. I see Jason up here, Texas toast. Good morning, gentlemen. He's got to keep talking. We're pumping. Wait, wasn't that Bob asking all the questions of Greg already? No. It was. Okay, yeah, just the mics aren't showing on my end. So, yeah, I thought that was you, Bob. Okay, cool. So this, this Hezbollah thing is just absolutely insane. I'm trying to throw stuff into the nest. But apparently 1200 Hezbollah members have been injured across limit on. And they just put Senate report that the United States went through and replaced all the pagers and cell phones of their staff members and hospitals about 10 days ago. So this is, this is fascinating. If anyone has any details on how this can be done and how you can make cell phones and pagers explode, please enlighten us. Okay, I take it that nobody knows the answer to that. So, only thing. Only thing I can think is just, you know, overload the battery. Make the batteries pop. That's about it. Yes, that's, that's the only thing I can think of as well, but it's just still, it's very interesting that they're, they're able to do this. So, but I definitely want to talk about some things that are going on. First, I think we'll go ahead and roll over Jacob. Just give me a thumbs up when you have video one loaded with Harris, but Harris did an interview over the weekend and she answered eventually some questions about our economic policy. And because this is the first time I've heard anything about it, I assume that most of you haven't heard it as well. So we'll play it. It's about a minute, minute, 30 second video, and I will go over some of the things that she wants to address if she was to become president. So, Jacob, whenever you're ready, sir. I love our small business owners. I learned who they are from my childhood and she was a community leader. She hired locally. She mentored our small businesses are so much a part of the fabric of our communities, not to mention really, I think the backbone of America's economy. So, my opportunity economy plan includes giving startups a $50,000 tax deduction to start their small business. It used to be $5,000. Nobody can start a small business with $5,000, but investing in people's innovative ideas and giving them the ability to go for it. Opportunity economy means, look, we don't have enough housing in America. We have a housing supply shortage. And what that means, in particular for so many younger Americans, the American dream is elusive. It's just actually not attainable. So, part of my plan is to work with the private sector and housing developers to give them a tax credit, to be able to partner with us as the government, to build in my goal is 3 million new homes by the end of my first term, in addition, to help people who just want to get their foot in the door literally. And so, giving first time home buyers a $25,000 down payment assistance to be able to just get in the door and then they will do the work that they need to do to save and to pay that mortgage and to build wealth for themselves and their family. These are some examples of what I mean when I talk about an opportunity economy and a lot of it has to do with just the community. So, the first time I've heard her talk about what she wanted to do, and so it's good to finally get some starting points on where she wants to begin. So, first thing I took away was she wanted to start tax deductions for creating a new business. They're currently sitting at about a 5,000 tax deduction if you create a new business, and she wants to increase that to $50,000. She also wants to create 3 million new homes in her first four years, and to decrease the home prices even further. She wants to give the builders a tax incentive to help them lower prices and then give an additional $25,000 payment assistance to first time home buyers. And so, I don't know how you all took this, but for me, I just heard money printer go per. There's going to be a lot of money getting generated to help get these programs off. So, if anybody has any thoughts or. And good morning Lisa. Good morning, guys. Well, I just think she's a fucking idiot. Let's start with that. I mean, she is the dumbest political candidate, in my opinion, that I've ever had the opportunity to, to consider on a ballot. I mean, the woman. I'm so sad for America that are. And that a woman is up there as a potential presidential candidate. She is just a fucking. lunatic idiot. I mean, who's just off on a speaking tour of speaking points presented to her by others. It's just shameful that this is where we are. At least I can't tell. Are you voting for comma? I know. I actually never considered it. I actually always thought she was an idiot even before she started talking. That's sexist. I completely agree and I'm going to just embrace the fact that I really see us. In a safer America with a powerful man at the helm. Show me a powerful woman and maybe I'll consider voting for her, but we just haven't had a candidate to choose from. That's a powerful woman. No, and I think that's what the issue we have right now is that the establishment is fearful of a powerful man who they would classify as being rogue, getting into power. Sorry, but that just doesn't make any sense, right? Like. The most powerful men in the world typically are very calculated in their actions and they're very hesitant to blow shit up and it just appears as though she's surrounding her herself with our people are surrounding her, which is probably the truth. People are surrounding her and and she's going along with this. Just this community of folks that just want to go blow shit up and create controversy. I mean, where are the diplomats? Where are people who can work through our problems and who can realistically approach the shift that's happening on our planet and go, you know what? It's sort of like when you're in a fight with your spouse, you're like, you know what? Let's just like both go to you go to that room. I'll go to this room. Like, let's put a little distance between us. Like, why aren't we in that situation as a world? Like, let's just keep a little distance between us and everything will be fine. You know, you stay over there. I'll stay over here. All will be well. It comes down to values, I think. They don't have the same values as what we have. And I quite certain that everybody on the panel has different values than the leaders in charge right now. And it's quite evident. They don't have any plans for the future because they have no reason to invest into it. A lot of them don't have children, so they don't care about the younger generation. It's what can they satisfy their needs with right now. And that's what it's coming down to. And I don't, I think we all know isn't in charge. There's other people pulling strings and these people have ill intentions. Yeah, but you hit on an interesting word values. I mean, in my opinion, it seems like the current administration is perpetuating the narrative that the Americans must be present around the world. And I disagree with that. I do not think that we need to spread American values around the world. Let's protect the American values here at home within this country. This is where we can do something to affect the values of what happens here. We can live the American values. We don't need to spend trillions of dollars, billions of dollars, hundreds of dollars, whatever it is, sending aid all over the place when things are so screwed up here. And I sort of hear the narrative of like, oh, the people don't have children and so they don't really care. I don't think that's it. I know a lot of people who don't have kids who who I have a good friend. That's like the greatest example of good friend in my neighborhood. I used to live in small town neighborhood. And this guy, you know, 40 year old guy, there was like a Lowe's delivery truck speeding down the street. He gets out in the middle of the street and he's like screaming at these guys to slow down because all these little kids are out playing in the street all the time. And, you know, the Lowe's guys just barreling down this street. And so my friend goes down there and blocks the Lowe's guys in with his pickup truck and calls the police. Right. Like, there are a lot of good people out there that don't have kids that want to do things to protect children all over the world that I don't see anything that that party has put forth, which shows that they want to protect children here in America or kids elsewhere. They're they're just looking for other destruction of every value that we've ever held tight. Home Depot truck definitely would have driven more responsibly. Yeah, I think local. You got chai ace. I don't think it's just a democratic party, though, Lisa. I think I do think that they're worse than the Republican party, but I think there's members of the Republican party that are just as corrupt and guilty. Of the situation that we are in. And so this almost falls perfectly into the next segment I want to jump into if no one else wants to comment on Harris's stimulus package she wants to implement. Okay, perfect. So Jacob, if you could go ahead and start rolling video to it's a really short clip of one of my least favorite people in the world. She's going to talk really quick and then I'll go over what she said. And boosting Trump back in 2016. But I also think there are Americans who are engaged in this kind of propaganda and whether they should be civilly or even in some cases criminally charged is something that would be a better deterrence because. So for anyone who can tell that was Hillary Clinton, and she was calling for or suggesting that Americans should be jailed for posting misinformation. And this to me is just very infuriating misinformation is just a made up term at this point. There's misinformation. It just means whoever's going against the current agenda. And so there's a lot to dissect from here and so to give a little background of why I'm so frustrated with what's going on. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken came out over the weekend and made a speech and he was trying to call on allies to censor the Russian media news outlet RT news. He accused the outlet of engaging in large scale disinformation campaigns around the world and called on everybody to limit the companies reach for citizens. As of last night, Facebook and Instagram came out and completely deplatformed RT news from their websites. And remember about two weeks ago Kamala Harris came out stating that if social media companies would not follow the government rules limiting speech, they will and should face consequences. Very, very turbulent time and very alarming time. And so I definitely want to get everyone's thoughts on what's what's going on here. AC Terrence. I was just going to say I bet Jason has something to say, but I can't even tell if he's on stage. Yeah, I'm up here. I mean, not at a loss for words, but maybe at a loss for an angle for this it seems so straightforwardly bad and speaking of American value so anti the what I used to think were bipartisan values that that I grew up with. And not just me, but like, you know, it seems like there was this shift over the last 10 or 15 years, specifically away from free speech. And so the idea of Hillary Clinton basically wanting to lock people up for tweeting in support of Trump seems a little weird on its face and the total lack of pushback is still shocks me kind of on a daily basis. The key thing feels a little different. I do think that, you know, we shouldn't tolerate literal propaganda. I think we need to, you know, follow the rule of law due process. I think that's equally important to our free speech values and other values out of the, you know, our constitution, et cetera. But if, if a foreign power is running propaganda, you know, let's call them operations, whether here or abroad, we should consider that, you know, maybe not a full blown attack but we should at least defend ourselves. However, we need to do that and shutting down our tea doesn't bother me the slightest. I think the TikTok ban is in the same category and that one bothers me a little bit more that's a little closer I think to getting the way of, of business. And yet, if that is a Chinese propaganda machine, then I think we should take action. So, I think it's, I think knowing what's true is a real is a real problem from, from a take action standpoint, be helpful to be able to figure that out. Specifically misinformation is rife in here. But I think the idea of locking people up for mean tweets like they've started doing England is, is appalling. And we should, you know, we should stand firm against that at a return. I got down mute, 100% Jason, I still don't think you should, deep platform, other, other agencies, though. I still think that you should just let them go. And if they're posting something that is propaganda, then you need to come up with facts and we don't, we don't find facts anymore. We just post whatever's convenient. Well, and just to pile on to, on to the top of that. Why are those, why is RT getting deep platforms, right? Like, it's not like Facebook just has some policy where, you know, they read something and then turn stuff off as much as it's, you know, as it's convenient to think that's true. That is coming from pressure from inside the US government, clearly, and that in and of itself is a problem. But I agree, deep platforming is not, is, is generally not the answer. No, and I think it's very comical that it was just a couple of weeks ago, Mark Zuckerberg came out and apologized for limiting, you know, information during the last election. And so he's just a mouthpiece at this point, and he's just trying to buy both sides because he's not sure who's going to take over, and he doesn't want to be caught in the crosshairs. But for me, you need to take a stance and stand by it. Don't keep blowing in the wind like a flag like this is, and I said flag FLAG in case anybody didn't hear that correctly. Just make sure you take a stand. Like, again, you're not going to please everybody, but that's, that's the part of doing your job. And so the other thing that really frustrates me is the misinformation quote unquote. Remember the laptop was misinformation during the last, the last, the last election. The Russia gate was also misinformation and disinformation. And then you can go ahead and look at COVID. All that, that everybody put out was misinformation disinformation, but all of those were actually factual. And so this is why I'm very frustrated with this. Lisa. Yeah, sorry, I don't want to derail this, but I just noticed someone commented that, you know, I enjoy your thoughts, Lisa, but these opinions are bad for Bitcoin adoption. I understand that you don't like or agree with Kamala, but she's certainly not stupid, blah, blah, blah. But she's wondering if anyone could help me understand how me not liking a political candidate is bad for Bitcoin adoption. Like, does that even make any sense? Nothing is bad for Bitcoin adoption. It's just a matter of who gets their first or who gets their last. I don't know how it would be bad for Bitcoin adoption. She hasn't made a stance whatsoever on anything related to the industry. So. Yeah, I don't think I can answer your question for you, but. Yeah, I think they're just confused and just want to yell. I'm just wondering if the things that she's offering up on her economic plan, if you have to be a US citizen in order to qualify. Or if you can't be a citizen or you don't qualify. I don't know if that was made in tongue and cheek, but that's actually a good question because I know that in California, they were trying to push for that immigrant home loan. So, not trying to push that past the, that past the California. I think Senate for sure. I think it's going to Gavin Newsom's desk. That's $150,000 loan specifically for down payments on houses in California. I think he vetoed it. Yeah. Oh, he hasn't had the money for it. So he vetoed it. But you're right, Jason. That was smart, but yeah, got pretty close. And a good morning. Wait hook and Shane Hazel. Morning, everybody. Lisa, I think you're right over the target. And I got to tell you, you know, when if you can't state the absolute obvious that Kamala is one of the laziest people when it comes to education, her own education. You can get through school. You can do all those things. You can climb the ladder, blah, blah, blah, blah. It doesn't mean you're a smart person. And in terms of being bad for Bitcoin, I will tell you right now, from having been in the industry, there are a lot of people right now that are sacrificing their principal for the almighty. And it's all mighty cuck fuck. And whether that's, you know, Bitcoin adoption in terms of, you know, moving Bitcoin off of exchanges into cold wallets or getting a certain demographic of people on Bitcoin. Like, you know, for me, if we're looking at the bigger picture here, and this is, you know, this will be my own bias take, but when we're looking at the bigger picture. The, the, the MAGA crowd versus these hair brain liberal retards. And I mean this with, with all sincerity. You know, this, this idea that, you know, who, who would I rather have in, in my surrounding area. Those people who love, you know, America, who, you know, in no fault of their own, they were born into an indoctrination system. And they, they, they were indoctrinated with the idea that we were all indoctrinated with it. America was the shining city on the hill. It was free. You have rights. There are things the government is directly dictated it can do. And all the other powers and rights belong to the people in the state. Those are the people that I would definitely like to be surrounded by. And those are the people that I would love to have adopt Bitcoin first and foremost. This crowd that wants to, you know, get, get by with no proof of work that wants to live off of everybody else. That is, you know, if, if, if, you know, our message isn't going to write, well, these people aren't going to adopt Bitcoin. Well, good. I mean, you know, thank God they're not going to adopt Bitcoin in time. Maybe they'll, you know, they'll be able to work for it later. But this, this proof of work society that we are trying to build in Bitcoin. It definitely doesn't need the quote unquote liberal crowd first and foremost. I'd much rather have the maga crowd in there. And yeah, Kamala is dumb as the day is long. I think you said that perfectly Shane dumb as the day is long. And it's so weird that she feels like she has to change her personality for every different city that she goes to. It's so mind blowing. I think it was, I don't, I don't think he's going to mind. He posted on Twitter. I think it was. A boomer Bitcoiner. It's the Bob. He's the Bitcoin miner. He, I guess he has an Asian wife. And he said that if he ever went to his in-laws house for dinner and tried to talk with an Asian accent, he would be kicked out of the house. He said there'd be no way around it. And the same thing with her. I don't know why people are giving her past on this. It doesn't make her sound more intelligent. It doesn't make her sound more authentic. She's never sound funnier. And I just, I don't understand why people can't see past that. Well, and just to take itself, Coleman, and to take itself, okay, we're going to start handing out more money to people. We're going to increase the supply of housing. Okay. If you're creating more money, this is just like the loan program for student loans, right? When you start to guarantee money for things, things go up by that amount, right? So if she's going to give everybody $25,000 out there to go buy a new home or at least $3 million of these things, which wouldn't even make a dent in the population that she's trying to corral for voting base, but let's just say it does, you know, that's not going to do anything but make house prices, you know, $25,000 more expensive per house at minimum. And then that's just to get started. I mean, this idea that she has any understanding of economics whatsoever. I mean, macro, micro, even at the 50,000 foot level is absolute garbage. Should we even have to tweet? There is no free lunch. I mean, is it that basic? You definitely do. People can't think for themselves, but I think it's so weird that I believe Goldman is putting out articles that the US economy is going to be much better underneath the Harris campaign that will be a Trump and it just, it just tells you how intertwined and corrupt all these different agencies are. You know what, I'm going to add something to that, though. I saw one of the Goldman guys come out that that is being, I don't know, I don't want to call it twisted, but the report, in fact, did say that they believe that it would actually, I don't think that they made a narrative. Statistically, it was like 0.1%, you know, or 0.01, whatever. It was this infinitesable preference towards the Harris campaign. It was not an endorsement. It did not like come out with this to emphatically praise the Harris economic plan. It was presented in mathematical terms and it was mathematically insignificant. Interesting. I never, I never saw that. But the only thing I've heard is the talking points where she parents that Goldman said, it'll be better underneath me, which again, it could be a fabricated lie. Yeah. One of the Goldman guys came out and was interviewed on the news and was like really not backtracking it, but he was like, let's just like, here's actually what the report said. And it was, like I said, it was presented in mathematical terms. Right. They had a, I think it was, they had a model for some effects on the economy over some amount of time, based on what Trump's policies had been and what Kamala's policies as they were known at the time. I also think that like, there were no policies. So they, who knows what assumptions they put into the model, but to Lisa's point, I think it was a marginal difference. It was like 0.1% or something like that. And yeah, very marginal, but it allowed the narrative to build that somehow Kamala's economy would be better than Trump's. But again, like, okay, let's just consider kind of what's being presented to us by the, by the Harris campaign, which is like narratives based on really, you know, facts that aren't quite true. Like their perception of, you know, 0.1% makes us a stronger, whatever. Like, I just feel like, doesn't anyone see through the fact that if you are presenting things that actually are minuscule, doesn't that make you look weaker? Like, if you're saying you're stronger, but then you can actually look at the mathematical, you know, the math behind it. Like, does no one actually look at the numbers? Does everyone live on the talking? I mean, I know we do. I know we all live on the talking points of what the mainstream media tells us, which is why no one should be listening to the mainstream news and I probably we guys don't. Anyway, sorry. No, you're good. And you said it perfect. No one, no one looks at the facts or the details. They just look at the headlines. And that's why everybody just quotes the headline and the headlines just gotcha. And then they go into the actual article, the headlines actually, that's not factual whatsoever. But while I have everybody here, I just want to give a quick thank you to our partners. Black sheep ammo, go check them out at black sheep ammo.com and restock your supplies. Go to solosotoshi solosotoshi.com, make sure you check them out. Go ahead and decentralize the mining pools by having your own at home liner. Punch plate. I don't see in the audience today, but check them out at punchplate.com. Put your seed phrase, not on your fridge like Terence does, but put it on a metal plate. And last but not least is palladium tower tactical. Check them out for professional great firearms training palladium tower. And I know we've been beating up on the Harris campaign quite a bit and it's pretty easy to do. But I definitely want to take some shots at the Trump campaign and Trump himself for trying to launch this ridiculous token. I don't buy lottery tickets with yesterday's numbers. So I didn't tune in to the event. But I heard just some talking points and it sounds like Trump starting off his Bitcoin journey down the shit coin rabbit hole. Does anybody did anybody look into it or listen to it or have any thoughts on what's going on with with his crypto token. I listened briefly because I was curious, but I honestly, I couldn't handle much of it. It just kind of reminded me of 2017, 2018 talk with all the ICO scams. And from my understanding, it's like roughly 70% or something like 67% goes to anyone who wants to buy the token. And then, of course, the founders, there's some kind of premine and they're holding back a certain amount for air drops and rewards. And a lot of the vernacular, I don't even understand. It just was a very, very crypto. The entire space were crypto people and they were very excited about it. And this was going to be amazing. It was going to be great, but I couldn't understand a single thing that it actually did. So it was disappointing. You know, I try to remind myself or we should remind ourselves like we all kind of went through the same journey and, you know, does Trump understand Bitcoin. I don't think so. Is he a deep Bitcoin? I don't think so. But I'd rather have someone be distracted by crypto or something that's relatively small in the scheme of things. And I have to just push Bitcoin forward all the time versus like some of the things that we're talking about with with Kamala. I mean, it's disappointing. You know, we all heard him in Nashville and we had hope for him and he has such a big platform and there's so many great things he could do and educate and say about Bitcoin, but I just don't think he's there yet. I also think he kind of doesn't know or care. I think he's just doing something for his sons or for some advisors or someone around him who was saying, Hey, here's a great way we can make money. You might win the election. You might not. Because on one hand, why are you doing this right before the election? I don't know why you would do that. But, you know, maybe the crypto community is just too small. We're just like a tiny, tiny percentage in the scheme of things. And so it's just a way for him to make money. I mean, his whole family and business has done this forever. They're always, you know, right or wrong and playing with broken rules and a broken system. They're always jumping at opportunities to license things to get their name out there to make a quick buck. I mean, we've seen this with everything from the University to the stakes. You know, there's been lots of scams, but this is just another one in essence. And Trump likes to put his name on a lot of things. And so it doesn't really surprise me too much. He wants to put his name on a coin that he's going to try and mint out there. But you're right. Everyone starts down the rabbit hole and they usually veer off to the left down the shit coin lane. And then they eventually link back up with Bitcoin. It is inevitable. But it's just unfortunate because he's got some strong players on his team that should be able to tell him better. But another way to look at it is you could see it as, you know, if he does get elected, it looks like there'll be some changes at the SEC. As I doubt they would allow this to go through with the current regime. Shane, do you have your hand up, sir? Yeah, you know, the thought across my mind is, you know, obviously Trump isn't coming up with any of this Bitcoin or crypto shit by himself, right? And so when you're looking at who's around him and who's doing this kind of stuff. Yeah, I don't know if it's his sons. I don't know if it's, you know, somebody close to him that, you know, pushing this freedom financial nonsense. But, you know, I'm not saying this is what it is, but it may be somebody in the audience who's better versed with the SEC could maybe fill it in. But it looks like this could be almost a trap for Trump in terms of setting something up that might be an unregistered security. It takes in a bunch of, you know, a bunch of money. Obviously there's nothing behind it because of the centralized, you know, shit coin. And then at the end of the day, he's going to start catching some real charges for what is in unregistered security and for, you know, for the campaign or whoever, you know, might be behind something like this. This actually might be kind of a stroke of genius in terms of actually bringing a charge that might stick against the guy for being out there and peddling, you know, something that he first and foremost doesn't understand. And secondly, that's, you know, not quite legal. Yeah, so it'll be interesting to see what happens. I think if he wins, I don't think it'll be quite as disruptive or could lead to charges. But if he, if he definitely loses, I think you're right with this assumption that this might be the path they get them on. I want to welcome Joe to the stage. Good morning, sir. Good morning, everyone. Jody, have any comments on the Trump coin that he was talking about last night? Yeah. Talk about disappointment, right? Very unfortunate. He's headed down that path. Just shows, you know, another indication and reinforcement of how he views the space. And I mean, I can tell you, I couldn't have pictured a worse end to his remarks at Bitcoin 2024 where he, you know, says, oh, have fun with your crypto and your Bitcoin, whatever else you're playing with. Almost trivializing the space. And I was, I was half listening as I had to get a report out. But, you know, he just shows you that he has no idea what he's talking about with this stuff. And he's seeing an ability to raise money and ability to get favor with the community. And he's exploiting it. That's by view, it's cynical. But I think that, you know, my hope is that he gets there eventually. A lot of people go down the wrong path before they go on the right one. That's sort of the optimistic viewpoint. But it is a money grab. It is people, you know, wanting to have the ability to, you know, get to the public markets. And they realize that, you know, the worst case scenario, if it's successful and they raise a ton of money, you know, it's not criminal. It's an SEC enforcement action civil. So it's basically a speeding ticket. So, like, this is the calculus that a lot of VCs make. And a lot of people launching these tokens make is that the worst case scenarios you have to deal with litigation from the SEC, which is completely overwhelmed by the amount of litigation they need to file and they need to pick and choose. And even if something comes, it's a speeding ticket where everybody can say we won. We got some money and they walked away with a lot more money. And it's a broken system, right? It's completely broken. And they need to fix Congress desperately needs to fix the legislation of space to give a better framework for people launching digital assets and not rely on the courts to do it for them. That is the problem. It's been a problem for years. Unfortunately, it doesn't look like there's an end in sight. And it will continue until lawmakers actually get serious. Thank you for that insight, Joe. And I'm going to ask you and put you on a spot real quick. Tomorrow, are you doing 25 or 50? Well, I mean, I tend to believe now that they're going to do 50 simply because of the pricing you see in the markets. I'm a big believer in the markets. I don't agree with 50. I think 50 is a mistake personally. I think the economic data doesn't support a 50-base point cut. On the flip side, the argument opposed is that it takes a long time for the transmission mechanism for monetary policy to filter through. It can take as much as a year between when cuts come to actually give relief to the marketplace. Just think about it practically. If you cut rates today, it's not like every consumer is going to instantly refi and have access to credit. It has to filter through new loans have to originate. The primary has to be affected. Mortgage has to be affected. And in some ways, they already have. I mean, mortgage has come down off the local highs. So I understand the argument. I think it's a mistake because they still think that some of the consumer price data is too robust and strong. But you're second-guessing. I'm far more interested, to be honest, whether they're 25 or 50. What forward guidance they give in their summer of economic projections? And for those that aren't aware, when they go and do these meetings, they give basically their forecast for where they think rates and employment and growth is going to be. And obviously, it's just their impressions of where they're going to be. They openly say that their data had depended and they can vary with every single meeting. But the market actually reads a lot into that. Right now, the market is expecting rates to fall significantly by the end of next year. If they cut 50, but then give a summary of economic projections where the rates remain elevated out through the end of 2025, the market's not going to like that. So really, the forward guidance product probably matters more, whether it's 24 or 50. But it seems by all indications, they're going to go 50. And that's what the betting markets are saying. Joe, what's your opinion, Alec? Do you think that it's due to political pressures with the election coming up? Or do you think that this is just part of the plan? Because, I mean, you could argue that they should have done 25 in July and 25 now. What's the problem? Yeah, they should have done 25 in July. They got spooked by a couple of data, for instance. First of all, you have to start from the standpoint that this is hard. What they're trying to do, they're trying to take an economy that is running well above trend in terms of nominal growth that was running with 80% employment. They're trying to engage in the fastest rate hiking cycle as possible. They're trying to do that without breaking the back of a labor market. And it's just like they should have started hiking to the kind of dams they do, dams they don't, just like they should have started hiking and stopped QE early when they were given the narrative about inflationary transitory. What they're trying to do is they're trying to get out ahead of this one, right? They're trying to make sure that they do it quickly to forecast any significant rise in unemployment. When you do that, let's just start from the premise, they're just guessing. You know they're just guessing. They don't have a crystal ball anymore than I do. They've got all their econometric models and data, and they're just guessing. So I, for one, think that gradual monetary policy is better than abrupt changes. But what they've had to do because of forward expectations is it had to do a lot more abrupt moves. You'll remember that they were in a blackout window in 2022. The market was primed for a 25-bit cut, and then they leak a report to Nick Timeros illegally, by the way, and say, oh, we're going to do 50 instead, because inflation's running way too hot. So they're always scrambling to not be behind the curve, and the problem is that they will always be behind the curve, no matter what they do, because the market looks past them. The market is far more important than whatever they're doing, and the market has already dropped rates. I mean, look at the 10-year right now. The 10-year just for those who are unaware. 10-year is currently trading at 3.6%. Now, just think about this. Okay, back in April, the 10-year was at 4.7%. So before the Fed has cut anything, okay, before the Fed has cut at all, you've seen 100 basis points drop in the 10-year. And the Fed can't really control the 10-year. There's economic conditions. In fact, there's well beyond that, well beyond their control to control the long end of the yield curve. But the important takeaway is the market moves faster than the Fed, and the Fed has to be nimble enough to react. And it's always the same. It always rhymes. They always have to go and do more than they think they do, because of the market saying, yeah, things are slowing down, and we think inflation's under control. So, Joe, maybe one last question. I know we're looking towards the end here. But do you think, obviously, Bitcoin's rallying, markets are rallying a little bit today with this expectation? I mean, wouldn't it follow that 50-bits drop in rate would scare or frighten the markets because the Fed thinks that things are far worse than they are? Thoughts on that? Yeah, I mean, I think that that is a credible argument. I think that, for me, I wish they would go more gradual, because I do think there's a risk of inflation staying stickier than people expect. And I do think the market will look at this and say, okay, they've clearly waved the white flag, but what are they really concerned about? Why are they moving so quickly on this? So I do think that this is a mistake. I wish they would do 25. If they were going to do 50 by this meeting, they should have done it in the previous situation. But the problem is this for them, okay? The problem will always remain that they have very blunt interest to control the inflation impulse. And when you have structural deficits, the little of an argument that nothing stops this train, when you have billions of dollars flowing into the marketplace, you have to wonder, is the high interest rate environment actually exacerbating the problems of inflation? Because a lot of consumers are not protected. They're protected from higher rates. 40% of all mortgages are all home, excuse me, are completely paid off. 40%, right? You've got a ton of other mortgages that are locked below 3.5, something like the balance of remaining mortgages are locked below 3.5. That just tells you that, like, what are they going to do with high interest rates? What are they actually trying to accomplish? And you have to balance that against, if they do cut over the next 12 months, that's going to actually drain money. It's going to stop the fiscal stimulus to some degree because you don't have to pay as much in interest, okay? If you're a boomer and you've got a huge money market account, you're getting subsidized by the US government. Hell, if you're not even a boomer, if you're Google, you know, Google with the money they're holding in treasuries, they're getting a ton of cash from the US government risk-free. Big companies with huge cash flow are benefiting from the high rate environment. So this is why you see, like, disparate effects. You see the haves doing quite well and the have-nots really struggling. And to me, what I think you've seen with the interest rates coming down over the last several weeks is you've seen a broadening out of the rally. You've seen small caps start to perform a little bit better. They're performing everything today. Bitcoin's doing a little bit better because Bitcoin loves low rate environments. It's always what it does the best. So I think on balance, like, the bigger concern is not what happens over the next six months. It happens in a year when you have inflation still running above trend. Joe, what do you make of Elizabeth Warren and two other senators? I forget their names requesting a 75 basis cut from Jerome Powell. Did you see that letter? Yeah. I mean, she's answering the calls from her base. She's got realers that donate to her and contribute to her. She's hearing from people saying the cost of housing is far too high, rents are far too high. And when people, I think, continue, I mean, there's a reason why a commala is talking about this real estate tax credit. The Dems see in the polling that this is a huge issue that the number one consumer price that we're all paying that is way too high is real estate. And we need to do something to fix it. Well, what's the easiest way to fix that if you're Elizabeth Warren? You get the Fed to cut because if the Fed cuts interest rates from her standpoint, right, that's going to make homes more affordable. I disagree with that in the long run, just for the record, but that's her logic. She thinks that that's going to make homes more affordable. That's going to prevent real estate landlords from passing on the cost of higher interest rates because that's, you know, that's their margin that you're helping. So in her mind, it's like a short term fix. The problem is it makes the problem worse on a long term basis. What you really need is you need a catalyst to get more supply into the market and get people to forcibly part with their real estate, which nobody seems willing to do. Nobody seems willing to actually, you know, trigger a significant enough recession to get people have to be for sellers. Well, once you see that pattern from politicians that nothing is long term, then, you know, are they ever held accountable? We don't have term limits. I mean, this is part of the problem. Well, what does it mean to be held accountable? Because I think people want this, right? Like the public polling showed that her that Kamala is playing about the $25,000 subsidy is very popular. That's why she released it. You know, we have gotten to be a culture where we don't like pain. We only like what is easy. We only like what's instant in gratification. And this is a problem. It's a systemic societal problem where people just are not willing to take their medicine. And the way it ends is not in my mind with some big blow up or collapse. I think it's far worse. I think it's just a slow creep in erosion of what has made the country great. And that's, to me, that's more depressing. I like that, Joe. I don't, I think it's sad. No, no, but I don't like, I don't like how it's ending, but I like your thoughts on how everything's going with that. But I do find it interesting because I remember you came on earlier in the week and you were talking about you. You, you, your thought or belief is that we're going to have stronger leadership and that was going to be the way out. But it seems like you do think that we're just going to kind of go up with the whimper and nothing's going to get changed. Correct. I still leave open the door to stronger leadership and things getting better. Okay. What you need to have happen for that condition is you need to have, and this is, you know, this is truth about history. You need to have some turbulence. You need to have people realize that, you know, things are getting tough and real men, real leaders, real women have to stand up and they have to actually say, okay, it's time for shared sacrifice. And, and that might be popular, right? In fact, I can tell you it isn't popular, but the question is not what is popular. The question is, what is right? And to me, like, I think that, you know, Bitcoin veterans will appreciate this, right? Sacrifice is everything. If you're not willing to sacrifice for the benefits and blessings of this country, then you're not going to get it forever. It only holds together. The system only works so long as people are willing to make sacrifices. Everybody getting what they want is not going to consistently, you know, achieve the kind of prosperity in a broad-based way that we need. No, I agree with that we need to make, we need to make hard decisions and it's not going to be comfortable. And we are stuck in a, in a weird place where people are just used to everything being easy. And that's that, that, that cycle that everyone mentions, you know, strong, hard times create strong men, strong men create easy times, easy times create hard times or easy. So let me, just, just one thing, just to think about this, okay? And you go talk to your friends and family, go talk to boomers who have had a pretty good ride, okay? I think maybe, you know, there's a lot of boomers that are struggling, but they've had a pretty good ride. Ask them if, for the betterment of the country, for the, for the good of the country as a whole to take care of debt issues, if they would agree to delay their social security for five to ten years, okay? Ask them that. I've done this personally. Hell, no, absolutely not. It's my money. I pay for it. Not going to happen. I will not agree to any reduction. No cost of living. No means testing. No, I want every dollar that's owed to me. Okay, that kind of thinking is what, it makes the country morally, societally bankrupt, in my opinion. That, that, I bet you won't find one person that's willing to accept that bargain because everybody wants theirs. I agree. And when you talk to a lot of them, they, they'll say, like, I don't even know how to spend all this money that I have, yet they want every dime that's owed to them. But what happens when there's nothing left to distribute? But that never really happens, right? It's never going to be, this is where I disagree. Like, it's not going to be like one day we can't pay the bills. It's one day, it's going to be one day we figure out what we have to do, you know, what the central planners have to do to weaken the currency or to quote unquote print more money or whatever they need to do to make it work. That's what happens. And that has long lasting consequences. So the, the thing I'll bring up really quick was the Social Security Administration put out that chart where they're not going to have any funds or they believe they'll run out of funds by 2035. So at that point, I just want to make sure you're quoting correctly, you believe they're just going to print the money to cover that deficit or that lack of budget. Yeah, I mean, through a combination of things, right? They'll either print the money or play other games with, you know, their long term treasuries and there's a variety of different things they can do. They can, you know, they can, they can do it sort of a two step approach where you're effectively issuing more debt, but then you're capping yield, you know, capping the yields on the debt so that they don't currently do this, right? That keeps the interest rate costs lower than necessary. So there's, there's all sorts of games they could play, guys, on and on and on with it, because it's fully controlled, right? You know, the problem I have is people keep keep underestimating the extent of which with which these folks are willing to do to keep the current status quo in place, but I'm sorry I got to jump for another call. It's great talking with all you. Or thank you, Joe, for coming up here. Always appreciate your insights. But we did run past a little bit. So if anybody else has any comments or anything like to go up their chest as your time. Well, I do want to thank everybody who is listening. Rick thinking I see you out there in the audience, Jackie, Gabe Lord, Death and Bitcoin, Randy K, and everybody who joined up here on the panel. Greg Fos, Bob van Kerr, Wade Hope, Jason, Shane, Karen, Lisa, AC, I really do appreciate you guys coming up here. I really appreciate Jacob getting everything done in the background. It really does make this job a lot easier for myself. Make sure you tune in to the Bitcoin veteran podcast, a video podcast tonight. It'll be on at eight o'clock or sorry six o'clock central time, seven o'clock Eastern time. We'll be having Randy K joining the show, and he's going to be talking geopolitics, sorry, and Bitcoin theory and how Bitcoin might change everything. So make sure you tune into that. It'll be live here on Twitter. And so that'll be at seven o'clock Eastern tonight. We do this every single morning, Monday through Friday at nine o'clock central time. Make sure you join us tomorrow. Again, we're going to recap everything going on through the day and talking about how we're going to go ahead and get on the mission and crush tyranny. I really do appreciate everybody coming on and go out there and have a fantastic day.