I can't guarantee they won't continue to try to make that case that the token somehow embodies an investment contract, which is ridiculous. With respect to candidates to replace Gary Gensler, I think just about anybody you know who has a background in the crypto industry. Dan Gallagher is mentioned, he's the GC at Robin Hood. It would be a vast, vast improvement.
This episode is brought to you by Gemini, which is one of the top crypto exchanges in the industry. I've been a user of Gemini for many years. They make it easy for you to buy, sell, and trade crypto.
Gemini has a lot of unique features. They have a fully functional app, a credit card, they include staking on their platform, and they also have a stable coin called Gemini Dollar, which is USD back and Gemini is certified regulated and since they are available in seventy plus countries, and if you sign up using my code or link which will be in a description, you can get fifteen dollars in bitcoin when you trade your first one hundred dollars. So if you'd like to learn more about Gemini, visit
the link in the description. Welcome into the Thinking Crypto Podcast. I'm your host, Tony Edward, and with me is attorney James Murphy, who's the founder and principal at met Lawman. James. Great to have you on.
Great to be with you, Tony. I've been watching your show and wow have you been getting some really a list guests. I'm grateful to be on with you today, given you know Hester Perse and Tim Draper. I mean, it's a real testament to what you've been accomplishing.
Thank you, man, and I had to get you back on. You've been on, I believe a couple of times and I always appreciate your insights and knowledge. And boy, the timing is perfect because as we're recording this, just about an hour ago, we got news Ripple has filed a cross appeal against the SEC. But let's back up a bit. The SEC file an appeal. What are they trying to achieve here? Are they trying to get more money or are they really trying to go after Judge Towards is ruling.
Well, we don't know for sure just yet. So it's going to be fourteen days from when they filed that simple one sentence notice of appeal where they explained to the world exactly what issues they are appealing, but I think we can make pretty good guesses on that. I mean, first of all, they are going to appeal the ruling that sales by Ripple and by Garland House and Larsen on exchanges. The ruling was those are not securities transactions,
and they were. They the sec were horrified by that decision, and you will recall they tried to get an interlocatory appeal immediately, which was denied, and so I think it is extremely likely that that will be brought up as issue number one. And then issue number two is they got zeroed out on disgorgement because of a Second Circuit case that holds that you have to have losses. You have to prove that somebody's lost money a pecuniary loss
as a consequence of the securities violations. They had no evidence of that, and so they got zeroed out. Now that rule in the second Circuit is at odds with the rule in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, and so the sec would really really like to undo that limitation on disgorgement. So I think that will be part of the appeal. And then the open question really is, thirdly, will they appeal the one hundred and twenty five million
dollar penalty and argue that it should be higher. They certainly argued that it should be hired to Judge Torres, But the judge has a lot of discretion based on all of the facts that she observed to decide what the appropriate penalty is. So it's unlikely that that would be disturbed on appeal. But that would be the third thing that might conceivably be appealed by the SEC.
James, what's your best guess how strong of a case or a percentage does the SEC have here of winning these respective appeals.
Well, that's what everybody wants to know. I'm pretty much an expert on the process and how it works at the Second Circuit, but predicting what a three judge panel on the Second Circuit will do is difficult. And so now I'm sounding like a lawyer again and caveating everything.
And they're about twenty judges on the Second Circuit and you get three, and you know they are people that immediately once you know the panel, you go and you look at the decisions they've made previously and see if there are any hints, and sometimes you see issues that you really want to push with one particular judge that they seem to be receptive to. And of course that's done a lot at the US Supreme Court, where you know, particular arguments will be pitched at one particular judge because
they could make the difference in a five to four decision. Anyway, if we review the bidding Tony, remember when that summary judgment decision came out. There are a lot of people that said this is crazy. You know. Charlie Gasparino wrote that, you know, scathing article saying this is crazy. You know, this is a dangerous ruling, and he said, I have spoken to prominent people in the securities bar who all
say this will be reversed. So the people that come from the tradifi tradition, including the lawyers, I think, believe that there's a good chance that the case will be reversed. The determination that those trades on the secondary market were not securities, that that will be reversed. I don't believe that. I believe that Judge Tours will be affirmed on that, but it's not a sure thing by any stretch of
the imagination. It's been my view from the beginning that Ripple's chances improve on appeal as you have judges that can focus on the big picture and look at what the Supreme Court has been signaling about agencies kind of getting too far over their skis in asserting jurisdiction in
various places and really questioning agencies. And so my guess, and it's only a guess, and nobody in the right mind should make any financial decisions or trades based on some guy on TV guessing, is that she will be affirmed on that determination that we've been talking about.
And of course, if Congress is able to do their job and get regulations through and let's say a new president comes in. Let's say is Trump and it's fit twenty one bill makes it out of the House signed into law, that could play a factor in all of this being put to bed, right.
Could be a very big factor, very big factor. So the way the timeline works, my best guess is it ends up with a decision in the first quarter of twenty twenty six, and so that means we have the entire legislative year of twenty twenty five, and I think it is very possible that will either have legislation establishing the trades of crypto tokens on exchanges are not covered by the securities laws, or we have very different leadership at the SEC where this you know, regulation by enforcement
tactic will be rained in significantly, which could result in you know, a favorable settlement or even dismissal potentially of the case and other cases like it, exchange cases. And so I think that political dynamic is being under considered in this whole thing, and everybody's saying, oh my gosh, that's gonna have the way until twenty twenty six and then,
oh my gosh, on to the Supreme Court. Possibly. I really think there's a better than fifty to fifty chance that something's going to happen in Congress with legislation signed by one of the you know, by the president, or significant direction change and pivot at the SEC, which would change the entire dynamic of this case.
Yeah. Absolutely, because I saw Chuck Schumer, a top Democrat. I've saw Patrick McHenry and some of the other Republicans talk about they want to get something done in the lame duck session by the end of the year. And I don't know that that's going to happen. But to your point, we at least have all of twenty twenty
five to get this sorted out. And I think I think there's a high probability because no one saw the FIT twenty one getting passed this year through the House and seventy one Democrats joining Republicans, and not to mention, Crypto's the biggest spender in this election. So I think a lot of Democrats are like, yeah, we're not dying on hill with Elizabeth Warren and Gary Ginzer and they're partnering with their colleagues to get things done at least.
Yeah, I think that's right. And you know, TV matters, and so the way Richie Torres, you know, the very liberal congressman from the Bronx in New York, is able to just you know, skewer and really make fun of of Gary Gensler and his approach to Crypto, that hurts because, you know, Richie Torres is a star in the in the Democratic Party, and he's an up and coming star. I was looking at his his website, uh, and he's got nine million dollars in a campaign war chest. I
don't think anybody's running against him, you know. So this is this is a guy to watch, and it's just not good for the administration to be putting up at ahead of an important agency like this to get humiliated, you know, with some regularity. So even if you know Kamala Harris wins, I just don't think Gary Gensler is going to serve out his term. I could be wrong.
Yeah, And it's the SEC has become so politicized, and it's embarrassing because now the industry is suing them. It's wild, which I love, by the way.
Yeah. Yeah, you know, there's no choice really with Congress kind of stuck in neutral. You can either take just cover up and take a beating, or you can fight back. And so the industry is fighting back in two ways. It's fighting back in the political realm very effectively. You know, a message is being sent. Regardless of how these races across the country come out, the message is being set.
If you are anti innovation and you're going to oppose any kind of innovation that has cryptography involved with it, then you're going to pay a price. You're going to find a wall of money coming for you. And they don't like that. What they like is being re elected, you know, And so that message is being sent. And then finally the industry has decided that they are going to you know, take the initiative and go to court and sue the SEC and put them on their heels.
And it's about time. And you know, they don't have unlimited resources there, so that's also an effective strategy. And they've seen how effective Ripple has been in really fighting back aggressively for four years now. Yeah.
Absolutely. Now, speaking of Ripple, the news that broke about an hour ago is that Ripple is going to file across appeal. I don't know if you get a chance to look at the details, but I would love to get your take on that.
Yeah, well, there really aren't much in the way of details. It like the original notice of appeal by the SEC is kind of one sentence saying we're appealing in this case, and then they've got a couple of weeks to say what issues they are going to be bringing up on the cross appeal. And so my guess would be that they're going to cross appeal the determination that the sales
to institutional investors were investment contracts. That finding, including the sales to Odel, which I think is on really weak ground. That's my thought that they'll appeal that if the SEC appeals the amount of the penalty. Then Ripple will cross appeal simply because they want the flexibility to argue no, it should be lower. If they don't file across appeal, then all they can argue is one twenty five is right.
If they cross appeal, I could say no, it should be much lower, you know which you want that flexibility, So that will depend on what the SEC includes in their statement of issues on appeal.
Do you think when Ripples moved across appeal, this may you know, maybe forced the sea. I don't know if that's a great word to say. You know what, let's just take the one hundred and twenty five million and get the hell out of here. Or Ginzer he's he doesn't care, and he's just going to cause as much chaos because he's an agent of chaos. But maybe the election changes things, but until he's kicked out, he's just going to create chaos.
I think that what we see from him is as the political landscape turns against him, he doubles down on aggression.
So I don't believe he's interested in settling. There is a process at the second circuit that all the litigants have to go through, where you meet and have a settlement discussion, but I think it's at this point unlikely because there's there's not a great spot to find common ground, because it is really the underlying issues that are more important than the one hundred and twenty five million dollars.
Believe it or not, it's a lot of money. But you know, our trades on the secondary market where the seller is the company or the senior executives at the company, if those are not securities transactions, and that certainly impacts all of the exchange cases where you've got even a more remote scenario where it's just some miscellaneous person unrelated to the issue, who's deciding to sell their salona, you know, to somebody else who wants to buy the salon. I
hope it goes up. That's once removed from what we have here in Ripple, and so you know, it undermines It's not a binding precedent. You and I have talked about that before. It's not a binding on other judges, but it is out there as persuasive President. We've seen a couple judges explicitly say I think Judge Torres was right.
I'm adopting her reasoning. You know, so they want to change that and they think, you know, probably like the experts who talk to Charlie Gasparino, they think they have a good a good chance at getting that reversed.
Now, Coinbase, speaking of exchanges, they asked the judge in their case to certify their interlocatory appeal so that they may present their case at a second circuit alongside Ripple. Break that down for us, what are you trying to do there?
Well, when the judge denied Coinbase's motion to dismiss, I was at that hearing and it was pretty clear to me, and I was sitting right next to John Deaton that this was not going to go Coinbases way. And when that happened, Coinbase immediately requested that the judge certified her decision for interlocatory appeal to address the fundamental question of are these tokens traded on the secondary market? Securities?
Are?
Aren't they? And she never ruled on it, which is really weird because an interlocatory appeal should get going quickly. So the whole point is to like say time, by getting the appellate court to decide a critical issue in the case that will bring everything or virtually everything you know, to a head and bring the case to an end,
and she never ruled on it. They filed it in April, and so when when the SEC appealed Ripple the Ripple decision, Coinbase logically said, hey, here's another chance to ask the judge, Look, this issue is going up and the second Circuit should have the perspective of your ruling and the broad and address the broader question of tokens in general, because remember, Ripple, the Ripple case is only going to be about the facts and circumstances around the sale of XRP, and it
probably will not announce a new rule of general applicability to all the tokens. And so that's what Coinbase wants to kind of short circuit all of this and bring it to a head. And it makes sense, and that was a really good move by them. And interestingly, I
was just looking at the docket earlier today. The judge got all the lawyers on a telephone conference yesterday after Coinbase sent their letter in and it doesn't say what they talked about, but it wouldn't surprise me if they were talking about interlocatory appeal, and the judge could have asked the SEC, hey, look, your appealing and Ripple related issues. Aren't you in favor of interlocutory appeal too? But they probably won't be, and so she hopefully will make a
decision one way or another about that. But I think it would be great for Coinbase to be in on the same track as the Ripple case and heard by the same panel at the second circuit, so that they get the full you know, impact of the entire crypto industry explaining the significance of this determination. I think it'd
be really good if they're not allowed in interlactory appeal. Nevertheless, I expect a wave of amekas briefs from the industry and hopefully from some key politicians coming in on the side of Ripple.
Rookie questions, James, why didn't the judge complete the work there in that Coinbase case? Is that some sort of malpractice?
Well, this happens, and this is one of the most frustrating things for clients. So I was just thinking about this the other day. You know, I'm retired, but this happened all the time. Client would say, James, it's been three months since the argument. Why is there no decision? I don't know. She's you know, judge's busy clerks are busy. She's got two hundred cases to deal with, you know, and then it's six months. James, We're trying to run
a business here. We don't know if what you know, the thing that is an issue in the case is critical to our business. We want to know yes or no, is this good or bad? And they want you know, they're always asking, hey, could you just call the judge reminder And the answer to that is, of course, no, you can never do that. Hey, could we send in a letter prompting the judge to rule. No. They take offense at that by saying, hey, you're not doing your job.
You're awfully slow. What's up with that? So the beauty of the scenario for coinbase is they were given a reason to send in this letter with the appeal in ripball, so that they had cover for and you could see in the letter they don't say, you know, it's been a lot of several months, your honor, you haven't done anything.
They kind of didn't say that, but put it back on the front burner for her, And so that was a good move by them, and I think it would be good for the entire industry if that interlocatory appeal was granted, for sure.
Yeah, so many exchanges right now locked up in battle. I mean Robin hood unis even though they got just Wells notices. But usually Wells notice is a precursor to what is going to come with a you know, a lawsuit. But you got cranking and so forth. Let's talk about XRP ets. You got a lot of filers, well, I should say not a lot, but two, and then Gray scarably launched their XRP trust. However, these things have to
be approved by the SEC. Do you think this appeal by the SEC is kind of the It will be a roadblock. They're going to say, you know, we're not gonna we're not going to prove this because hey, we're not sure what's going to be the outcome here.
Do I think that they would use that as a rationale to deny. I think they would, And they could say, look, there is uh uncertainty here, which would make the disclosures really tricky in launching an e t F because in order for the for there to be an e t F, the asset has got to be a commodity because these are called commodity based trusts, these e t ps and so I don't think they want to grant uh the x RP E t P. That's that's their inclination. I
think they felt a little trap. They certainly felt trap with the Bitcoin, and then with the Bitcoin precedent, they went ahead with the with the ether, and so I my this pure guess work. I don't know. My guess is they're going to drag it out. They might force somebody to sue them again like what happened with the Bitcoin thing, and you know, ultimately probably lose and be
forced to approve at some point. But again, this is another one of those instances, as you pointed out, where there's this whole political dynamic, and so if the leadership of the SEC were to change, then you'd have certainly a lot more openness to these kinds of products.
Yeah, and you know what I thought about as you're saying that the hearing, We had just a couple of weeks ago where all five commissioners were before the House Financial Committee and the question was asked to each commissioner, yes or no, would you be open to Congress providing
updated legislation and so forth. You got yeses from you in the Democrat commissions, like Crenshaw and so forth, and obviously hesseburst Mark, Youada begins her couldn't even answer that, and he's just like, you know, trying to answer a question with a question and stalling and you know, deflecting. It's pathetic. And boy, I can't wait for this guy to get out of there. And I know, just this
was it this week. Yet we got some candidates who could potentially replacing or replace him that came out from the Trump camp. What are your thoughts on some of those guys.
Well, a couple of things. One, as I watched that hearing, I really felt like this whole discussion of fair notice was really helped a lot. I mean, there have been many many statements by hester person dissentse and Uda, but this one it seemed like it was dialed up. You know, on the stereo up to eleven that there's no way of knowing what the guy at the end of the table here Gary might be up to next. You know, it's impossible to predict. And that's not the way our
system is supposed to work. You're supposed to have a rule of law that is clear so that people can comply with that rule of law. And if they choose to violate that rule of law, great, they get prosecuted for that, but you've got to start with a rule of law. And now the thing is just morphing to where the SEC apologized for using the digital asset security term to imply that the token is itself a security.
That they apologize the one judge, but I can't guarantee they won't continue to try to make that case that the token somehow embodies an investment contract, which is ridiculous. With respect to candidates to replace Gary against Ler, I think just about anybody you know who has a background in the crypto industry. Dan Gallagher is mentioned, he's the GC at Robin Hood. It would be a vast, vast improvement. But you know, the question is what do you really
really want to accomplish. If if your goal is to open up you know, the potential for innovation in the United States around blockchain technology and financial technology built on blockchains and all of that, that's great, that's important, that should happen. But if you're of a mind that what you really want is to reduce the size and scope of our government, starting you know, with these agencies that just get larger and larger budgets every year and hire
more people. And so you have the SEC who now has, you know, its own climate change policy and it's implementing
ESG policies, which there's no congressional authorization for that. So my point is, if you are looking to really really grow the government smaller so that it matches what is authorized in the United States Constitution, then you might not actually want somebody who used to work at the agency whose inclination is to defend the agency, defend the size and scope of the agency and the authority of the agency against others in the administration who want to you know,
let's get rid of fifty percent of the people here, let's get rid of fifty percent of the regulations. If you have somebody who grew up the SEC. And by the way, there's like this network of SEC alums and I'll get once they leave, you kind of join the SEC alumni network and get together and you trade cases. Hey, i've got a conflict in this case, you want to handle it, you know, and then of course you'll send one back to me, you know, And they work together
and all, and that's not a terrible thing. But anyway, they defend the institution instinctively. And so my point is, what do you want to accomplish. If you want to just you know, make sure you innovation has a runway here in the United States, that would be one thing, and that's an important thing. But if you really want to reduce the scope of government, you may not want somebody who grew up at the SEC.
Now, speaking of the alumni who got SEC Director of Enforcement is leaving gerbier Griwall. He's going to be out, I think by tomorrow, and there's talks that he's going to go to a law firm that is supposedly defending cryptocomp And I'm just like, what the hell is this
is this crazy revolving door. And I know it's not specifically, this happens as you mentioned, these government agencies get so big, these people get so much power and so forth, and I'm just like, how do you spend years attacking in the industry and now you're going to go work in the industry. And we saw Jay Clayton do that too, Bill Hinman and so forth.
Well, this is interesting something I've I was heavily involved with in my career and recruiting people from the SEC, the law firm. Mill Bank is a very old, established, old line law firm that's been around for a long long time, well well over one hundred and fifty years, and it has a fantastic reputation. I was a little surprised by this hire. I don't think mill Bank is
on the forefront of representing the crypto industry. That's not to say they don't have crypto clients, but if you were to ask me to write down a list of ten law firms, they would not be on that list of those fighting for the crypto industry. But when I was recruiting from the sec we would do very significant background checks on anybody we would bring in a certainly as a partner. You know, there's hiring from law schools of young lawyers just starting out, but when you hire
a partner, you don't want to make mistakes. You do a deep study, or at least we did, because we may maintained a very very high bar for talent, and it's the reason that we went from non existent in twenty ten to being recognized as the number one securities regulation law firm in the Entry in twenty twenty one. Because we were really strict about our hiring so why am I saying all this stuff? Well, the reason is this guy had a role in the debt box case.
He was not the guy on the ground in Utah handling the debt box case day to day, for sure. But what happened was when those guys got in trouble and the judge issued an order asking the SEC to
explain why they should not be sanctioned. Then grew All got involved and the judge was not impressed by his involvement, and the judge pointed out that the SEC misrepresented some case law to him after the misconduct had come to the surface, and that it was at the same time that grew All submitted an affidavit in the case personally hands on involved and there were more problems at that time.
The problems were compounded and the judge said that it's not me saying this, and they doubled down on misrepresentations to the judge. And so what exactly the role of mister Garral was in all of this, I do not know, but he was certainly involved and that would have given me personally some pause in hiring him.
Yeah, but I think eleanor Turned of Fox Business highlighted that there's already a former SEC official there who's actually defending Binance working in the Binance case, and Grewall is the one who launched the enforcement action against Finance. So part of me is like, you know, are these guys not really true believers in what they're doing and they just follow order some Genzert But when they leave, they're like, Okay, I'm going to go work for the crypto industry because
maybe I can get a nice paycheck. I'm not saying is anything necessary wrong with going work in doing that, but like you were just on the forefront of attacking the industry, it's just so weird.
Yeah. I would say too that the Ripple case itself is a little bit weird and why that was brought in the first case. In general, I would say this is very typical and normal because, let's face it, Ripples got Mary Joe White and Andrews Siresny representing them, Siresney being the former Director of Enforcement, you know, an exact
parallel situation in Binance. They've got Bill McLucas, who was a legend at the SEC and Enforcement, and so when you're looking for the best lawyers to defend you typically That's why I hired so many SEC lawyers. We had a couple dozen in my firm. You want people who are experienced in the SEC high really good smart people in general. So and then they learn, you know, inside the agency, how everything works, and the strategies that are effective those that are not. And so it's not unusual
at all in our business. And you know, my I remember distinctly one of my partners. We were in the Division of Enforcement there for what's called on the record testimony, which is essentially a deposition, and we were walking down the hallway with my client and I brought my partner because he worked at the Division of Enforcement for a long time. And what happened was a number of lawyers came out of their offices and hugged my partner. And so my client was looking at this saying, this is great,
I must have the right lawyers here. They're hugging my lawyers. So that just gives you sort of an indication there is a value there to hiring people who have been there, done that, and still have relationships where you can have good, honest exchange of information. Hey, where is this investigation actually going, you know, and can we work something out? It's easier to settle perhaps with someone that you've known for a long time, with more frank dialogue between the two of you.
So in general, it's not unusual. I think with Gruel and his involvement in the debt box thing, would me personally, I'm just speaking for me, would give me a little bit of pause.
Man. Anyway, let's move on because I'm upset about that. So now Crypto dot Com launch a proactive lawsuit against the SEC. We saw Consensus did this and it was one out of Texas legilex as well. I think it was earlier to sear her last year. What are your thoughts on Crypto dot com proactively going against the SEC after getting a wells notice.
Well, I think it's good to be aggressive. I think they've got a tough challenge because the SEC always counters with the case is not ripe. You don't have standing because under the Constitution there must be a ripe case or controversy. And all we did at the SEC was threatened to sue you. We didn't decide to sue you. If we had decided to see you, then maybe you'd have you know, And this is this is really sophistry,
but it works. Often in court to say it's not yet ripe, because the Wells notice means that the staff, distinct from the commissioners themselves, the staff of the Division of Enforcement, has come to the conclusion that they are going to recommend to the commission to institute a lawsuit, and that the Wells notice gives the defendant the targeting investigation and opportunity to submit something called a wealth submission to try to change their mind, either change the staff's
determination to do that, or it's also shared with the with the commissioners and they read it and on a rare occasion they might might decline to approve what the enforcement people want, but in general they do rubber stamp their recommendations of enforcement if it gets all the way up to that point. But in any event, it's it's gonna be tough for crypto dot com to get over the hurdle of this initial motion to dismiss if the
SEC is going to bring saying it's not right. And you know, that's what they said in response to Freddie Rispoli's case about I'd like to know whether ethereum is or is not a security because I'm using it in my in my practice it's it's you know, it's so fundamental that we're entitled to know what the rule of law is so that we can comply, particularly lawyers we have, well most lawyers, almost all lawyers really really want to comply with the law. And that's what Freddy was doing.
And the SEC said, yeah, incredibly, they said we haven't decided yet whether athereum is a security or not. And they got away with that, you know, and it was just hurt at the Ninth Circuit and the hearing didn't go very well, you know. So unfortunately, I think, UH Crypto dot Com has got an uphill battle just to stay in court down there, but you know, I'm pulling for him.
M M. Final item here John Deeton versus Elizabeth Warren debate coming up one of the UH, I would say important election items aside from being the president, because Elizabeth Warren in power is Gary Gins her big time, she has a lot of power or seeing the financial markets. What do you think about this debate coming up? And are you you know, are you expecting some fireworks and things like that?
I think so, you know, John has acknowledged that he's got an uphill, difficult, narrow path in Massachusetts just by the nature of you know, the demographics there in the you know, the the very large advantage that there is a Democratic registration versus Republican registration, although there are a lot of a lot of independents there and they have a tendency to vote for Republicans for governor. You know, they've done that quite a bit, so they are open
minded people. You know, there's been some polling coming out that says that Elizabeth Warren's approval numbers are the lowest they have ever been. You know, she's been up there for twelve years. So I'm very excited to see the debate, as I know many people are. I think, if I've said this from the beginning, if John gets his message out, he's gonna win. You know, but it takes money to get get his message out. And she's got an enormous advantage,
you know, being such a powerful senator. It tends to attract campaign money, and so she's got a lot of money, and John, you know, could really use some support from the crypto industry and from people who just care about common sense leadership in the Senate. And we've got to you know, get this illegal immigration problem under control. You know, it's not the top one percent who are hurt or
impacted by this. It's the people at the bottom, the working poor, you know, who are you know, being crowded out in terms of the availability of support from the government by this this large influx of illegal immigration. And so, you know, there are a number number of issues that
that I look forward to to hearing about. But fundamentally, John understands the people who are struggling from you know, inflation and are really really worried that their children or their grandchildren are not going to have the opportunity that we call the American dream. You know. And my mother immigrated here when she was nineteen years old, and that's all she wanted from me was to live the American dream. And education was really beat into my head about how
important it is. And and so I've been, you know, a beneficiary, just just as John, you know, as the amazing story of what John has overcome and what he stands for is no, we're not giving up on the American dream. That thing is alive and well and he's going to fight for it. And the indispensable element of the American dream is freedom. Part of the motto of the United States Marine Corps is first to fight for freedom.
That's who John is, and I think that's what the people in Massachusetts want, and so I hope a bunch of people will tune in and really get to know John and get behind it.
Absolutely, I'm rooting for John and fingers crossed you can get this done. And obviously there's multiple issues, you know, as you clearly stated, and you know crypto is obviously one of them because Warren formed the anti Crypto Army. I don't know what made her decide to do that, but I'm hoping she gets taken down in the election.
World.
Yeah, James, always a pleasure. Thank you so much. I appreciate your insights.
Thanks Tony, always enjoy the conversation with you.