Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

Ryan Rasmussen says anti-crypto senators would rather pass cloture and stall than let the SEC write the rules "If you are anti-crypto and you have the ability to either pass cloture now and then stall out for the next year, year and a half, you're more likely to do...

36,292 views • 11 days ago •via X (Twitter)

9 Comments

The Wolf Of All Streets's profile picture
The Wolf Of All Streets11 days ago

FT @RasterlyRock This clip is brought to you by @hodlwithLedn

ZFG 🇺🇸's profile picture
ZFG 🇺🇸11 days ago

except that after cloture there is only 51 votes needed to pass the Clarity Act which is a much easier barrier..

jreverb's profile picture
jreverb11 days ago

I would agree with this if passing the cloture vote meant you needed another 60 votes down the road. But I don’t think that’s the case, the cloture vote ends the filibuster road block, starts a 30 hour debate window that then goes to a simple majority vote needed for passage.

Tex 🇺🇸🌱's profile picture
Tex 🇺🇸🌱11 days ago

Dems won’t let anon have nice things they can have ownership of

Paeno's profile picture
Paeno11 days ago

I got to say, that went well, and really mean it. It feels good to have a reason for the optimism.

UAccess's profile picture
UAccess11 days ago

I think it’s crazy that a group of people that have been proven multiple times to be scammers and criminals against the people are still some how making decisions on their money 😅 Crypto shouldn’t need approval at this point. Majority vote is from the people and the people have spoken.

Daniel's profile picture
Daniel11 days ago

passing cloture just moves the bill to the floor where it can easily be stalled or amended, especially with atkins and the sec waiting in the wings to rewrite the regulatory framework anyway. until the actual legislation clears both chambers and the sec finalises the rules, the underlying liquidity profile for risk assets does not fundamentally change. today is essentially just binary headline risk for the news bots to chop both sides of the range, rather than a genuine macro shift we can position for🤓

Bergruhe's profile picture
Bergruhe11 days ago

These “anti crypto senators” don’t even have a clue about what is going to happen with the global financial system and it’s transition on the blockchain and “crypto” the coming years….it’s allready happening 🤣🤣🤣

Kelly James III's profile picture
Kelly James III11 days ago

Great update. Your take cuts through the noise on these senators. You and @mozlyxy are my go to finance accounts.

Related Videos

🇺🇸 THE MYSTERIOUS FILIBUSTER! - As much as we talk about the filibuster, few people actually understand it. Under filibuster rules you don't need 60 votes to pass legislation. You need 60 votes to get to cloture, which means you can then vote on the legislation. Right now with the SAVE America Act we have 51 votes. We have enough votes to pass the legislation but we can't get to cloture because we can't get enough Democrats to cross the aisle to get to 60 votes. Of course Democrats don't want election integrity. We talk about the nuclear option, thinking that this means the Senate will vote to end the filibuster rule. That's not what it means. Actually achieving cloture to vote to end the filibuster rule would require a two-thirds Senate vote. And that's impossible. What is possible is when you bring up the SAVE America Act for a cloture vote and you only get 51 out of the 60 required, a senator can then raise a point of order saying that "cloture on this bill should only need a simple majority." The chair would rule against him, backed up by the parliamentarian. That senator can then appeal and the question becomes, "shall the decision of the chair stand?" The Senate then votes on that appeal and if 51 senators vote to overrule the chair then the vote on the SAVE America Act can take place. Yes this is a tortured way of doing things but that's "the nuclear option." Harry Reid did it in 2013 on federal judges and Mitch McConnell did it in 2017 on Supreme Court judges. But again the problem we have now is: do we have enough Senators to get to 51 to do the nuclear option? According to John Thune we don't. Thoughts? ⬇️

Bill Mitchell

17,413 views • 2 months ago

Chamath’s 2026 IPO Advice: Get Public Fast or Get Left Behind Jason: “ What are your thoughts here on the flurry of potential IPOs?” Chamath: “I think that we have a bit of a risk problem. If you think about appetite as equivalent to a person at a Thanksgiving dinner, when you first come in and you see all of this stuff, it's so plentiful, your eyes are bigger than your stomach. And I think in a moment like that, you want to be the one that is consumed first. And I think the risk increases when you are at the tail end because the risk is that the diners will run out of space.” Jason: “Plate fills up. Yeah.” Chamath: “And if you use that analogy, I think the reason why people's plates will get full is probably twofold and maybe threefold. The first and most important thing is there's enough tactical event risk that people generally want to be risk off and have more margin of safety. We have a lot of these really important financial moments tied to this concept of AGI, ASI. We have a real pricing problem. If AGI is real, the durability of most companies is slim to none. If AGI is not real, then the fundraising capacity of these companies that are now raising hundreds of billions of dollars needs to get questioned and inspected thoroughly. History will sort out which one is right, but both cannot be right. So in that vein, I don't think we're going to have this “blockbuster” stream of IPOs. I think what happens is SpaceX is going to get out. They're going to do great, and then maybe the next one does good to great, then the next one will do good, and then the appetite runs out because you just can't absorb, incrementally, trillions of dollars of new demand. And if you think about it, where is it going to come from? Is it going to come from the sidelines? I don't know, I think it's more of a reallocation exercise. But if you look at the S&P, well, most people are now defensively moving away from these kinds of things, towards the things that are more protected, what the industry calls HALO, right? Those things trade for zero today. You could buy hundreds of millions of dollars a year of cashflow for 2-5x right now in the stock market. And so why are you going to go way out on the risk curve and buy something at 200x revenue, let alone earnings? I'm more in the camp of, I think it's good to be first, it’s pretty decent to be second, but if I were you, I would get the heck out, and get public, and get your money, and fortify your balance sheet ASAP, because I think the risk builds the further down the IPO chain you're in.”

The All-In Podcast

61,917 views • 5 months ago

Maple Finance co-founder Sid Powell 🥞: "We're in a market regime where everyone is very depressed about the prices of assets... There's a lot of pessimism... But the actual underlying traction is very good... the level of adoption is actually growing much faster than people appreciate... Right now, capital formation- and prices- is actually well below adoption, but I think prices will catch up again." This is from an absolutely fantastic interview that Sid recently did with Stefano Sanabria from Alea Research that sort of slipped under the radar a bit, but was particularly noteworthy imho... There's a bunch of excellent segments in it but the one embedded below is on this current disconnect that we are all witnessing in crypto... Obviously we are deep in the recesses of goblintown right now and I think Sid is 100% right that this price action does not match the fundamentals... And I think this is more true in defi than in any other area of crypto. You have a whole bunch of blue-chip defi protocols that are utterly revolutionizing the financial landscape and who are building with a decades-long vision in mind and really legitimately moving the ball down the field in terms of blockchain's subsuming of tradfi rails. Stuff like Aave, Pendle, Hyperliquid, Maple itself, and a bunch of others... The pathological bear'ism affecting markets right now is 100% misaligned with the above reality, and I think this discorrelation will violently correct sometime this year (most likely once rates get dropped following Warsh replacing Powell in May). So yeah, absolutely fantastic interview and I wanted to clip a few of the highlights and encourage you to watch the whole thing, so will do so below and then provide the link to the full version of it 💪

rektdiomedes

16,680 views • 7 months ago