ROLLUP: China's $500B Stimulus | Kamala's Pro-Crypto Pivot? | Gary Gets Grilled | EIGEN Unlock Incoming

So I will recommit the nation to global leadership in the sectors that will define the next century. We will invest in biomanufacturing and aerospace, remain dominant in AI and quantum computing, blockchain and other emerging technologies.

Was that it? Was that was that a pivot?

Does that count as a pivot?

I don't know, David. I

don't know.

These are the first words out of Kamala Harris's mouth about

well, blockchain.

It's not nothing. It may be barely more than nothing.

But it is.

It is something it is something more than nothing. It is certainly something more than nothing.

We'll talk about that. I think that's maybe the first thing we want to talk about. But we also have on the weekly roll up the Beijing Bazooka. David, I want to tell you this week China might be dropping its biggest economic stimulus since the pandemic. Remember Raul Paul's banana zone that we were promised?

Beijing bazooka banana zone? It's all bees.

We also got Gary getting grilled in front of Congress by both sides of the aisle, and also our favorite Hester Peirce and other SEC commissioners at his side giving a little different uh kind of responses to some of this grilling. Also, Nick Carter has revealed some of his findings related to choke point 2.0. Uh turns out chokepoint 2.0 was even more illegal than we knew about. And also, Eigenlayer, the Eigen token, finally getting unlocked after first getting released back in April 30th with non transferability status. Iron Eigenlayer's token is now going to become transferable.

And uh you gotta do the highlights of the Solana Breakpoint conference, a lot of things coming out of there. And I want you to tell me about those th things, David, as a big uh soul maxi. I know that you are, so uh I can't wait to hear it. Uh but let's start with the clip that we played at the beginning of this. So, Kamala Harris's words this is I think the second thing she's ever said about crypto blockchain, that sort of thing. Because two times was actually

Times in one week.

Okay, okay. So can you give us the first, and then we'll give the context for for the clip. So, what is the first thing that she said earlier in the week about crypto?

So two days earlier, on Tuesday, I believe, Kama said that she would encourage innovative technologies like AI and digital assets while protecting our consumers and investors as precedent. And these are comments that she made at a Wall Street fundraiser, uh, reported by a Bloomberg reporter, uh, also releasing her economic plan. Uh, 80 pages, digital assets were mentioned once. And so this was on Tuesday. And this kind of made the rounds on Crypto Twitter, not because of what Kamala Harris said, but because uh the Standwith Crypto Twitter account took this statement and gave Kamala Harris a rating of a B.

As being somewhat pro-crypto.

Upgrade upgraded from we

know

From nothing, from from no statements. So it was the first statement that Colin Harris has ever said about crypto. And Stand with Crypto gave her a B, as in saying she has made a somewhat supportive statement about crypto, which caused kind of an uproar because Donald Trump is given an A for strongly supports crypto. And this one single statement where Kama Sarah says she would like to encourage innovative technologies like AI and digital assets while protecting our consumers and investors somehow earns her a beat. And so Crypto Twitter did not accept that. That was like this doesn't feel right at all.

you gotta say Donald Trump earned that A with respect to at least uh

rhetoric. I mean he's

It's gotta be A honestly A plus. A plus gotta be an A plus.

yes, or something. It's like you know, for for all of the uh the um patting on the back Donald Trump he gives to himself. I actually think he can pat himself on the back for his rhetoric and talk and the the the folks he's surrounding himself and commitment with respect to crypto. But Kamala Harris, a B

B

did not feel right.

Okay, so that the it she didn't maintain a B because there was an uproar about this, yes?

Yeah, so a bunch of people push back. Uh Tommy from Delphi put out a statement saying that this just is not deserved. I put out a statement saying, like, hey, like, let like I'm I want Democrats to be pro-crypto just like the next guy, but like, come on, that's not that's not what this is. Uh just because we have technically a statement that could be interpreted to be pro-crypto does not earn her a B. And also I think Jesse Eckel put a thread together that I think really drives the point home. Saying that we want to be supportive of digital assets while protecting investors is like the same thing that Gary Gensler says. And he puts on like just going through the receipts and saying all the times that Gary Gensler has said, I want to like serve digital assets and protect consumers. Like, and so like you that this could be super veiled, super vague, and actually mean something totally negative.

Okay, so for all of the folks that have been looking for the uh Democratic and and specific uh the Democrat and specifically the the Kamala Harris pivot, right? We got you got Kamala Harris, part of this week, hasn't said a thing about crypto. And by the way, she still hasn't used the C word.

Hasn't you

It's kind of a mantra of me, like like for for me, is it say crypto? All right, say Bitcoin, say crypto.

say it?

Give us that signal. Yeah. We we need to hear crypto. When you say things like digital assets with consumer protections, we don't know exactly what you're talking about. Regardless, the first time she has weighed in on this at all herself as a candidate was this week. And she did it in three ways. The Wall Street fundraiser that you mentioned, where she said she would encourage innovative technologies like AI and digital assets.

While protecting our consumers and investors. Who knows what that means? Right. And then she also said it uh in the clip, where in the context of remaining dominant, uh, we have to remain dominant in AI and quantum computing and blockchain, she said. And then it was also in the in the policy document. There was there was one phrase,

digital assets, in conjunction with AI, in the in her um, you know, democratic uh platform policy document that she mentioned. First time

Yeah.

ever.

Three three times in one week. And I think this is the reason why I think you can be allowed to get excited. That first statement, ambiguous. I'm not really giving any sort of credence to the legitimacy of the first statement on Tuesday. The statement that she gave on Wednesday, which was the one in the clip, to me, that is unequivocally a pro crypto statement. Remain dominant in blockchain means it's like we have the industry. It is not a lot, Ryan, but on the side of the fence about pro crypto, neutral, or anti crypto, it is pro crypto. That is a pro crypto statement.

It is pro something, maybe. I don't know if it's pro crypto. Again, this use of digital assets and pairing that with consumer protection, it's similar to state.

Didn't not in the second statement. In the in the second statement she just said blockchain. Which again she's not blockchain

Okay.

not our words but it slightly better domin remain dominant in blockchain. That is a pro-industry stance.

Okay. So I am not saying that it's nothing.

Uh-huh.

It but but it is ever so slightly more than nothing. It is a couple of grains of sand.

Yeah.

It is like in the in the journey of a thousand miles, she's maybe thinking of putting on her shoes to go out the door and start that journey. Okay. Like that's how small and insignificant it feels in the context of you know the last two years of a Biden administration just coming after crypto with everything they got.

I think people's interpretation of the significance of these statements really matters on what you think about how Biden has treated the crypto industry and whether or not you carry that forward into your interpretation of Kamala. My interpretation of a vice president is that they have no power. They are just along for the ride. We all completely forgot about the existence of Kamala Harris while Biden was president. She had she was not on the steering wheel. And so, like, w whether you not or not you want to carry forward Biden's policy and apply them to Kamala's is like your choice. I don't think that's completely intellectually honest to just say Biden is equivalent to Kamala. Like, this is a new slate. Once if she gets elected, she will have nothing to both. She owes nothing to the Biden administration. So it is a legitimate chance at like an actual reset. And the context, the data points that we have, it's not just these three statements that have come out in this last week. It's also Mark Cuban, who, you know.

Mark Cuban, very Democrat, wants Kamala to win, very biased. He says, I talked to the Harris team today, who told me in no uncertain terms that they are against regulation through litigation. And then he says, See you later, Gensler. You're uh you leaving is worth a point growth in GDP. Also, this uh Axios article has this interesting title, Harris Embracing Crypto in Overture to Young Men.

I think the claim here the claim here, I think, is that the Kamala administration is seeding the media with preparation to fully pivot, quote, pivot on the the the if if there was going to be a pivot, these, in my opinion, would be the signs. And not just that, Maxine Waters also turning around and trying to get uh stablecoin legislation. All of this is happening at once. And to me, this is positive signaling that the Democrats are now finally caving to the power of the crypto industry and need to do something, need to answer to something.

Okay, so I I will say it's gone beyond like uh they're a little bit farther than they're not trying at all. And now they're at the stage where they're like barely trying. I I do think that a lot of Democrats in Congress have actually pivoted. The the Maxine Waters statement, we even heard her yesterday, I mean, or earlier this week, she was talking in the congressional hearing. Hey, I want to do a stable coin bill, right? Right? We got some deal making to do. Let's get a stable coin bill done. I think that is starting to thaw. I also totally know that the Harris campaign has seen the polls and they need young male voters. And many of these young male voters are disproportionately crypto advocates, right? You know that 20 to 40 age demographic.

of males that she just doesn't have. So I can totally understand why she's like edging into it. But when you start using the P word and pivot, well like that is a bridge too far to like maybe maybe this is pre pivot.

It is a technical pivot. As in, like the Democratic Party has been hammering crypto.

Them doing nothing is a huge change of direction already. Them like going from hammering crypto to doing nothing is a change of direction. Doing the most marginally positive statements is so incredibly different from what is currently happening, which is we are being smothered by them.

But in order to earn the P word, I think it's kind of like stand with crypto, where you you gotta earn your B if you're supportive of crypto.

I do not think that Kamler deserves a B

right now.

Okay, but I don't think she deserves a pivot at all because in order to like, she said she wanted to rip remain dominant on blockchain. In order to do that, what you need to do, fire Gary Gensler, stop Operation Chokepoint, unwind SAB 121, fix fit, sign that, rescind the SEC Wells notices to six of our US-based crypto company, support stablecoin legislation, rein in this anti IRS DeFi rulemaking that's happening right now. Draft pro crypto DNC policy and stop sanctioning smart contracts like Tornado Cash. Do you think she is prepared to take any of those actions? Because that's what it requires to remain dominant in blockchain, as she said.

I'm mostly focused on the change in trajectory, where first we had nothing. Now we've had three things out of the Kamala like campaign in the last week. And then you also get this Maxine Waters pivot ish. And the like the change in direct uh trajectory is kind of like what I'm focused on. We definitely need more. Like it can't just like stop here, but like, come on, like that's three data points, four data points all in a very short amount of time. That is something