Podcast appearances and mentions of judge torres

Prayer Judgment and Revival (2) (audio) David Eells – 8/6/25 Going over What the Lord Showed Me About the Asteroid that's Coming Brandon @ Last Days – 7/26/25 (David's notes in red) https://youtu.be/xUTlHLlBy_g?si=1W7FB9aV5GfR-osX Portion of transcript: Speaking of the revival, the Lord said, “Heaven and Earth are about to collide with the greatest harvest of souls and the greatest demonstration and manifestations of My glory that this world has ever seen before. In a 24-hour period, He said, “Brandon, everything you know, [will change] we're at the point of no return. We're at that point. It's time to push.” It's time to push. (Laboring to bring forth the Man-child body which will bring the revival as it was with Jesus the Man-child. History repeats on a larger scale.) He said, “You're looking at a thin thread.” Remember that hair-thin thread I saw coming up? I said, “Adam's lease is coming up.” Do you understand? We're about to step over the water's edge. We're about to step over the waterfall. (Revival) And the Lord said, “You're about to see something I long for you to see.” Why? Because it was there, the lease; it was Adam's timeframe of a 6,000-year window. Now, we're about to step into the 7,000–year window with the 7-year tribulation. (According to Numeric Bible Chronology we are already in the thousand year sabbath but men are breaking it by their works so tribulation comes.) We're about to see some radical things. Radical and amazing things with the Holy Ghost and fire like we've never seen it before. We've only seen glimpses of it. The Lord said, “You've only seen glimpses of it with Azusa Street, …, with the Welch revival. These only lasted for just a short window. But, Brandon, what I'm about to do, all those others will pale in comparison to what is about to happen in these last days.” (Amen!) But He said, “I have to give you a warning about the plague. I have to tell you to stand and pray and tell the people that I'm coming.” And He talked about Psalm 91. (He will come to us as the Latter Rain to once again heal the plagues of men as Jesus did in the former rain.) Then I saw an asteroid, and He was talking about this telescope called Lucifer. And then He called it Satan.  (I have read that the Vatican's telescope was originally called Lucifer but was changed to Luci in 2012 to avoid controversy.) I thought how this was a very demonic name, and I wondered if I was hearing this right? And is this the Lord or Satan? I saw this telescope in the Arizona West and it is massive. (That is where Luci is.) The lens on it was ginormous. As I was looking at this, I saw men wearing white lab coats, and they were talking and writing things down. They said, “The odds are in our favor.” And “It's unlikely this will happen.” China was involved, and they were communicating back and forth about what they were seeing coming. China said, “This is going to hit. This is serious.” But the people in America were like, “Uh, I don't know, I don't think so.” But China was taking it seriously. They were freaking out. I could see these educated Chinese men calculating and talking back and forth. They knew something serious was about to happen and that we were not going to divert it. As I was looking over into outer space, I saw a massive rock heading toward Earth. They said, “We were not telling them because it would cause panic. But the odds are in our favor that it will not happen that it will miss.” But it will not. I saw other space debris by this major rock. It was a massive piece of rock, like the size of a planet. (No one would survive the largest rock; there would be no tribulation.) And there was a smaller one beside it, and there were ones they would consider to be…. And I heard the word ‘planet killers' were behind it, like bunches of them. As this thing was moving and all the others with it, it looked like a debris field behind it. (Earth can generally survive impacts from asteroids smaller than about 0.6 miles (1 kilometer) in diameter, as these are less likely to cause catastrophic damage. However, an asteroid around 7 to 8 miles (11 to 12 kilometers) wide could potentially wipe out most life on Earth. https://science.howstuffworks.com/nature/natural-disasters/asteroid-hits-earth.htm ) (I have no doubt a rock in the tail will hit. Brandon has been very accurate.) The Lord said, “Watch the sun, watch the tides. For things are going to change, and change quickly. Your water and your waves, the way the tides come in and go out because of the moon. Things are going to start to shift like you've never seen before. The tides are going to act very strangely; they will be higher than average. They will come in further than what they're supposed to. When they pull back out, they will move out further than they are supposed to.” I heard this and I could see it. Something was affecting the tides. This rock, something serious. The Lord said, “Watch the pressure on the Earth for a major volcano is about to erupt, and not just one volcano, but it will be multiple all at the same time.” I saw earthquakes measuring more than 9.0 in more than one place. They happened in multiple places at the same time. (Even a flyby of this monster could do this but I suspect one or more from the tail will hit.) The Lord said, “I told you and I warned you that it would affect the sun's light and the way it shines upon the Earth, for it will create a disruption in the birds' migration. It will cause a difference in the timing of when animals breed because it will confuse their natural instincts. All animals and creation were acting weird. Even the agriculture of the flowering and planning (planting) will be thrown off because of what's coming. I saw the magnetic poles and how the Earth was shifting, and it was moving differently.  Even the daytime will be different, and the way the Earth spins will be different. (A wobble is likely) Some people think it's a flat Earth, but it's not. (Amen)  He said the sun will look different in the days ahead. You will need to hear Him in the days ahead because of what I saw. The Lord said, “Look at Venice, Italy.” I could see the water in the city acting weird; there was flooding and a rise in the tides. There were “water events,” that's what I'll call them. Water events are about to take place in Italy that have never happened before because of what's happening to the Earth. The Lord said, “Watch Venice, Italy, and watch Rome. Watch the volcano that's about to go off in Europe.” This will be an event that is not just one in the ring of fire, but this will be a global event that starts taking place. Then I saw India and the Lord said, “Look at India, for a lot of the pagan temples will be destroyed with earthquakes in the days ahead.” I saw the glory of God coming in, and there were many in the harvest. I'm talking major revival throughout India. I saw monkeys on the temples and old shrines completely decimated by earthquakes. It was like when the walls of Jericho came down. Everything was flattened; there was nothing left, it was like rubble. The Lord said, “I will bring in My presence, and I'm going to decimate those false gods and false places of worship. There will be a great revival throughout India and all throughout Asia. I saw great Buddhist temples completely decimated when this takes place. They were shaken to the ground like piles of rubble. A major distraction is about to take place. So I asked the Lord more about this. I asked Him, “Is this about the two flying saucers? Is it the two alien ships?” This is a deception that's about to take place and it's false. It's demonic spirits. There is no such thing as aliens. (Absolutely True) There will be things in the sky that are going to scare many people in the days ahead, thinking, “This is E.T.; they really exist!” No. These are fallen angels; it's demonic. This will be how they will explain away the rapture of the church. People say, ‘I don't believe in the rapture,' but it's going to happen. (See our book: Hidden Manna- It clearly comes at the end of the Trib.)  I'm telling you by the Spirit of God, you need to get your houses ready. If you're not on fire for Jesus and your heart is not serving Jesus, today is the day. You need to get right with the Lord. People ask me when this will happen. I don't know how long before this happens; I'm just here to warn you about what's coming. So, I saw these major alien ships, and I saw it go over the Vatican and go over the Mayan temples down in Mexico. And I asked the Lord, “Are there two of these?” I have been praying about this, and He said, “No, it's just one.” This is going to make everyone freak out because they will see it moving across the ocean and think it's more than one. It will be seen on TV. Then I saw little tiny ships coming out of the mother ship that looked like balls of light. But it wasn't a real ship. Understand. This was a demonic-looking light that was traveling around, causing much confusion in our skies. I know this sounds “way out there.” I didn't even want to talk about it, but I'm instructed to. I'm here to warn you. As wild as it may sound, there will be fearful sights you will see that will bring you to your knees. I'm here to warn you of these things. The enemy does not play fair; he's trying to deceive people with what's coming and throwing many curveballs to try and deceive the nations. When the antichrist comes (See Hidden Manna) on the scene and he says, “Hey, we have a solution for all the problems in the days ahead.” “I'm going to bring peace and prosperity. All you have to do is bow down and worship me on Fridays…” “And you're going to have to get a chip. But it's going to be a solution because we're going to take care of all of this with AI. AI has the cure for diseases. We're going to fix diabetes, we'll fix cancer, and we'll fix autism. We're going to do all this through AI technology. If you just serve me on Fridays and do all that I tell you to do, we're going to fix all your ailments.” You watch! This is how they get everybody with hook, line and sinker. People will think that he's such a nice guy! (antichrist) They'll say, “Don't you know he has a plan to help everybody?” It's coming. But I won't be here to see it. I won't be here, and none of you will be here to see it. Those of us who are believers and have our lamps full of oil. (See Hidden Manna- Absolute proof we will all be here.) I heard the Lord say, “Pray. They're going to try to get another major virus in the days ahead.” I saw another major virus and the Lord said, “Rise up and pray, church! Pray that the glorious church rises.” People will be looking at us and asking us, “Do you have a solution for this new virus?” And we don't need to be handling this like we did COVID. You can either be hiding in your church or your houses because you're afraid of this thing, or we can be the glorious church and rise up and pray and take our authority over things. (Amen! Brandon – Exo. 15:26- “I will put none of the diseases upon thee”.) Last time in 2019, people were caught off guard. I heard about it six months in advance, about how there was going to be a major virus, but I didn't have a platform to warn people like I do now. (I told people 3 years in advance.) The Lord told me, “I'm giving you a window, Brandon, pray and tell them that they're going to try to do it again. But this time it will be COVID on steroids and it will be a whole different strand.” I'm trying to warn you that they have a plan for the future, and it's not that far off. (We can pray most of this down.) This will not just affect humans; I saw that it will also affect cattle and your pets. I saw dogs, cattle, birds, everything, lying dead everywhere. It was spreading to livestock everywhere like a plague. It was like the black plague of death. (in Europe 1346-1353) It was awful. But the glorious church! Remember, they had light in Goshen while it was dark in Egypt. I'm telling you that in the household of faith, if you rise up, if you pray and you read your Bible to know the Word of God, it will be like He said, “A thousand shall fall at your side and 10,000 at your right hand, but it will not come nigh you.” (True, if you believe) I asked the Lord, “What things can we stop?” He said, “Terrorist attacks; you can stop plots against the churches, but Brandon, you cannot stop Matthew 24.” He said, “You can be at the right place at the right time, and it won't affect you because you're My beloved. Be where I tell you to be and do what I tell you to do. Hear Me and be in sync with Me at all times and know that nothing will come nigh you.” (True) The Lord said, “Listen to Me, Matthew 24 will take place.” Which says, there will be wars and rumors of wars, plagues, pestilence and earthquakes in diverse places, massive storms, all these things and seas and waves roaring, men's hearts failing them for fear when they see all these things coming upon the Earth. We're going to see things we've never seen before, because the Bible says so. But there are certain things we can pray about and stop, and things we cannot stop. (We can almost always lessen the effect of them.) I'm telling you the things we cannot stop are going to happen, but they don't have to affect you. We're here in this world, but we're not of this world, right? We're underneath the shadow of the Almighty, under His wings, and Him shall we trust! And I know He's watching over me. His goodness and mercy are following me all the days of my life, and I will dwell in the house of the Lord forever. But it doesn't say I won't go through the valley of the shadow of death, but I will fear no evil. His rod and staff comfort me. He prepares a table before me in the presence of all my enemies. He told me He would take care of me, and I believe Him with all my heart that He will. And that's the place where I want to see all of you too. Regardless of what we see coming, and the birth pangs. He said, “As the labor pains that are coming upon a woman, Brandon, it's going to get really radical now.” And He said that as we go from Rosh Hashanah and even more from September (I think it's like the 21st)), when we hit this time frame, an acceleration of things is going to happen even on a greater level. But I'm giving you a window of financial outpouring. Believer for it. Pray for Judge Torres and these judges to let go of the things and crypto. That these corrupt people will set boundaries and laws and establish it and that it will all be a blessing for the body of Christ. People need to be listening. It won't all come through certain investments that you think it will come through. Don't limit God in your natural minds. Think bigger! The Lord said, “You're not thinking big enough.” He told me, “Brandon, I have a million and one ways to get you a million dollars. Do you understand Me?” “I am the God of more than enough. I'll provide for your ministry. I'll do whatever you need if you just ask Me in faith. Do you understand? My hand is not short.” Do you understand? He's an exceedingly abundantly above all that you ask or think to ask, God! And from what I've seen coming, you better get your house in order and your heart right before the Lord. You cannot be playing church anymore. If you thought COVID was bad, you haven't seen anything like what I've seen. For most people, it will steamroll them because their hearts are not ready, and they're not right with the Lord. It's not time to play church anymore. You're either hot or cold, but if you're lukewarm, He will spew you out of His mouth. You may say, “Where's the grace in all this?” I believe His grace is sufficient for every single one of you, but you need to be on the side where the devourer is rebuked, and He said He rebuked the devourer for your sake. You say, “Well, I'm a tither and I have tither's rights.” You either believe what the Word of God says for His promises (Psalm 91) or you are a doubter. A true believer believes that God will do what He says He will do. The Lord told me that there's too much static in the air. There are too many false prophetic words going forth. They're listening to a familiar spirit and they're speaking to itching ears, and they are not warning you what I'm trying to tell you. And He said that you either speak for Me or sit down and be quiet. Because I'm telling you, I saw judgments. The Lord said, “Judgement begins in My house first and many people don't like that.” But He said, “I'm cleaning house, Brandon, and I'm really about to clean house!” There will be righteous people rise up who have never had a platform before, similar to mine. They will rise up and say exactly what He says to speak. You're going to see signs and wonders that follow those who believe. (The “greater works” ministry.) He said, the true demonstrations of the manifested presence of the sons of God. When you're moving and doing what He told us to do, you will see the signs and wonders. I believe it with all my heart. We're about to see things like we've never seen before. But it's time to be like it was for Jeremiah and all those other prophets of old, when they spoke for God; you'll see things. You're going to start to see the manifestations of what they're saying. You are going to see healings and demonstrations in the glory. There is too much confusion and too many people parroting things. The Lord said, “I'm dealing with this.” He told me, “Your job is to tell what you see and what I'm telling you in prayer, and you relay what I'm saying.” I don't consider myself a prophet, and I've said this before. The Lord said, “I want you to pray and intercede for the revival and lead My people to Jesus. That's your main priority right now.” And He said, “True prophetic voices will be leading people to Jesus.” They'll have altar calls and tell people they're going to hell if they don't repent. They're telling people that Jesus is coming, like John the Baptist in the wilderness eating locust and honey and telling everybody, “There's One coming. Jesus is coming.” But they missed the way Jesus was coming, and history repeats. He came in a body of the Son of David, and the apostates missed him. Here, Hidden Manna could show us how He is coming in the firstfruits sons of David and then His elect, before coming for us. Just as in Jesus' day, the creation of God was waiting for a Son to come with the Word of deliverance from the curse of corruption, so it is in our day. (Rom.8:19) For the earnest expectation of the creation waiteth for the revealing of the sons of God. (21) that the creation itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the liberty of the glory of the children of God. In Jesus' day, spiritual “children” had led His creation into bondage to corrupt religion and sin, but God sent His “Son” to deliver them with the unleavened bread. So it will be in our day. The foundations have been destroyed by many generations of children put in positions of leadership by those who have wanted their ears tickled. In times of apostasy God gives them what they want. (Isa.3:4) And I will give children to be their princes, and babes shall rule over them. (5) And the people shall be oppressed, every one by another, and every one by his neighbor: the child shall behave himself proudly against the old man (mature), and the base against the honorable. (12) As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they that lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths. God's solution will be to reveal His sons, whom He will use to restore a repentant remnant with the truth that sets free. In His first body, Jesus offered this deliverance to “the lost sheep of the house of Israel” (Mat.10:6) before there was a great falling away, but in the corporate Man-child Jesus will offer it to the called of the “whole creation” to restore the elect. (Rom.8:22) For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now. The work of the Spirit is to bring us to adoption: spirit, soul, and ultimately body. Jesus was the Son of God abiding in the Son of Man. He was the Son in Spirit and Soul when He still inhabited a body of the seed of David (Rom.1:3). His ability to fully walk in the Kingdom came when He received His redeemed, glorified body. So shall it be with the Man-child manifested “sons.” They will first manifest Sonship in spirit and then progressively in soul through persecution and suffering, as it was with Jesus. (Heb.5:8) Though he was a Son, yet learned obedience by the things which he suffered; (9) and having been made perfect, he became unto all them that obey him the author of eternal salvation. Through this stage, the Man-child sons will minister in power to the called of God, as it was with our pattern, Jesus. In Romans we see the last step of full adoption through the new body. (Rom.8:23) And not only so, but ourselves also, who have the first-fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for [our] adoption, [to wit], the redemption of our body. Our faith, like our Father's faith, “calleth the things that are not, as though they were” (Rom.4:17), so we must claim our Sonship before we see it. (Gal.3:26) For ye are all sons of God, through faith, in Christ Jesus. The manifestation will come to those who walk by faith, beholding the Son in the mirror. (2Co.3:18) Those who claim their Sonship, and the authority and privileges that go with it, because of the redemption wrought in Christ are accounted as sons. We are “justified (Greek: “reckoned or accounted righteous”) by faith in Christ” (2:16). If I believe that “I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I that live, but Christ liveth in me” (20), then I am a son by faith even if I am not yet a son by manifestation. (3:6) Even as Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned unto him for righteousness. (7) Know therefore that they that are of faith, the same are sons of Abraham. Therefore, if we have received the Spirit of Christ and believe that He now lives in us to do His works, we are sons by faith. (4:6) And because ye are sons, God sent forth the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, Abba, Father. (7) So that thou art no longer a bondservant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir through God. Those who live as joint heirs with Christ are walking in the faith of Sonship and will manifest His works by God's power. Jesus said, “He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater [works] than these shall he do; because I go unto the Father” (Joh.14:12). God is carefully bringing His servants/children who walk by faith to manifest Sonship, first the Man-child and then those disciples who follow in His steps. (Pro.29:21) He that delicately bringeth up his servant from a child Shall have him become a son at the last. While the apostates were waiting for the coming Messiah, He was being manifest in their midst as a man-child born to a woman. According to this type, the apostates in our day are waiting for Jesus to come in the sky to save them. They do not understand that He will come first manifested in the Man-child. The “Son” will come to be manifested only in those “children” who “abide in Him.” This is what the manifestation of Sonship is. Those who do not manifest Sonship will be “ashamed” like the man without the wedding garment, when they physically see Jesus. (1Jn.2:28) And now, [my] little children, abide in him; that, if he shall be manifested (in us through Sonship), we may have boldness, and not be ashamed before him at his coming (Greek: parousia, meaning His “physical presence”). Both the ancient manuscripts and the numeric pattern say, “if … He be manifested” (NENT). “If” shows that only the “children” who manifest Jesus or Sonship will not be “ashamed” when He comes. The KJV translated this as “when He shall appear” because they thought this was a reference to Jesus' physical coming, which truly is a “when” and not an “if.” A major problem with this translation is that it has Jesus coming twice at the same time. “When he shall appear, we may have confidence, and not be ashamed before him at his coming (KJV).” However, “manifested” here is the Greek word phaneroo, meaning “to ‘appear' or make visible.” It comes from the root word phan, meaning “to shine.” The same word used in many other places plainly shows us that the glory of Jesus will “shine” out of our “mortal bodies” (Rom.8:11) to “appear” to the world. (2Cor.4:11) For we who live are always delivered unto death for Jesus' sake, that the life also of Jesus may be manifested (Greek: Phaneroo meaning “shining appearance”) in our mortal flesh. Obviously this is a spiritual shining out of us of the righteous glory of God, but sometimes God allows even lost people to see it. Around 1984 I was witnessing to a man who said, “I saw you some years ago and there was a light shining out of you wherever you went and I wondered what it meant.” (6) Seeing it is God, that said, Light shall shine out of darkness, who shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ. Notice in the same text that if we know the true “face of Jesus Christ” in the mirror by faith, His glory will shine in us. (3:18) But we all, with unveiled face beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are transformed into the same image from glory to glory…. (Col.3:4) When Christ, [who is] our life, shall be manifested (in us), then shall ye also with him be manifested (“shining appearance”) in glory. Back in our 1 John text, we see that when we are children, He has not yet made His shining appearance in us. (1Jn.3:2) Beloved, now are we children (Greek: teknon) of God, and it is not yet made manifest (“shining appearance”) what we shall be. (If He makes His shining appearance in us, “we shall be like him.”) We know that, if he shall be manifested (“shining appearance,” i.e. in us), we shall be like him; for we shall see him even as he is (in the mirror). The ancient manuscripts, the numeric pattern, and the Received Text all say “if he … be manifested” here. Notice also that those who “see him even as he is” in the mirror by faith “shall be like him.” We must believe that “as he is, even so are we in this world” (1Jn.4:17). The rest of this text confirms this manifestation of Jesus will come in those who have a “confident expectation” of it. (1Jn.3:3) And every one that hath this hope (Greek: “a good, confident expectation”) [set] on him purifieth himself, even as he is pure. Can we purify ourselves “as he is pure”? Those who have a “confident expectation” of this manifestation of Christ in them will receive “grace” to walk in it. (Titus 2:11) For the grace of God hath appeared, bringing salvation to all men, (12) instructing us, to the intent that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly and righteously and godly in this present world; (Only those who are “looking for” the “shining appearance” of Jesus' glory from them will have it.) (13) looking for the blessed hope and appearing (Greek: epiphaneia, a “shining forth”) of the glory of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; (Notice that this does not speak of the physical coming of the Lord but of the coming of His glory in us. Epiphaneia here speaks of Jesus' coming in us and is distinct from parousia, which speaks of His personal “presence” or coming. In other words, He will come for those from whom He is “shining forth.” He is coming in His saints before He comes for His saints. To this end He sacrificed Himself.) (14) who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a people for his own possession, zealous of good works. The Man-child is made up of those who are the First-fruits company to manifest the glory of this purity. Those who “fight the good fight of the faith” shall have this epiphany of Jesus, either as the Man-child or as the Woman He leads into this understanding. (2Tim.4:7) I have fought the good fight, I have finished the course, I have kept the faith: (8) henceforth there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give to me at that day; and not to me only, but also to all them that have loved his appearing (Greek: epiphaneia). Like Paul, those who have loved His “shining forth” in them shall have the “crown of righteousness.” Jesus was called the first fruits who, as a reformer, imparted Himself into disciples through the Word and anointing of the Holy Spirit. Then they went forth as a corporate body to pass this on to others. Today a corporate body of reformers is about to be revealed to do the same with a much larger portion of the Church. Signs and wonders will cover the earth. Now, here's a portion of a prophetic warning we shared earlier from Brandon Biggs at Last Days: https://youtu.be/9epckXNXLN0 Also, we need to pray over our water supply. (Brandon doesn't share anymore about the water supply in this video. However, I read Bill Gates or his organization plans to buy up water suppliers. Given his depopulation history this cannot be good.) He continues, I saw an article from Fox News saying that Trump and BB have agreed on a two-state solution. This is one of the things from the Abraham Accords and they were saying how they wanted to make a two-state solution, and they were agreeing upon it. I have spoken before that if they do this two-state solution, 3 days later the New Madrid fault line will go off and America will be divided in half. (I have said this for at least 30 years. believe the NM will go off but it will be greatly diminished compared to the dreams and visions because of prayers for God's mercy.) When this happened, I saw great big Chinook helicopters flying from the west to the central part of America carrying supplies. It sounded like the earth was shaking, they had so many helicopters over the affected area. And this is where I said before where I saw the Lion's face carved into the side of a building and I had warned everyone that I saw tumbleweeds going down Wall Street. (In the Long Run we will lose Wall Street) The Lord told me to look at the Lion's face and I saw it was the building that was the New York Stock Exchange. The Lord was warning that if they divide Jerusalem, if they do a two-state solution, He is going to divide America. (I believe it will quake and crack but not with the huge divide) I saw the nation split down the middle and all the bridges going down from West to East, completely destroyed on the Mississippi River. I saw from Texarkana, Texas, to Tulsa, Oklahoma where I saw over 1800 people die. I saw the massive building at ORU (Oral Roberts University) was split down the middle and on fire when this earthquake happens. Houses that were built on cinderblocks were completely leveled and destroyed. Houses built on a foundation did better. I saw thousands of people died when this event takes place. That is why I've always told people we must not divide Jerusalem, for when we do, 3 days after… Now I want you to hear me, that's how strong this Word was. I saw the Liberty Bell ringing and old cast iron bells ringing when this event happens. Three days after Jerusalem is divided and agreed upon, there will be 3 days and God will divide America. We must pray that this does not take place. This announcement has been shared on multiple news channels and including The Jerusalem Post. Pray. (I do not believe it will be stopped, only lessened. I have taught for many years that the Man-child ministry of Jesus will begin when the NM goes off.)

Crypto News: Ripple drops appeal in SEC XRP case as Judge Torres pushes back on both parties. President Trump makes bullish statements about Bitcoin and Crypto. Dana White says he is all in on VeChain.Show Sponsor - ✅ VeChain is a versatile enterprise-grade L1 smart contract platform https://www.vechain.org/ 

This Day in Legal History: Federal Housing AdministrationOn June 27, 1934, the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) was created through the National Housing Act, marking a major shift in the federal government's role in the housing market. The FHA was designed to address the housing crisis of the Great Depression, when foreclosures were rampant and private lenders were reluctant to issue long-term mortgages. By insuring loans made by private lenders, the FHA significantly reduced the risk of default, making it easier and more affordable for Americans to buy homes.The FHA introduced standardized, amortized 20- and 30-year mortgages—innovations that quickly became industry norms. These reforms expanded access to home financing for middle-class families and jump-started suburban development. However, the agency's early policies also entrenched racial segregation through redlining, where predominantly Black neighborhoods were systematically denied FHA-backed loans.While the FHA has since evolved and is now part of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), its legacy is a mix of increased homeownership and the deepening of racial disparities in wealth and housing. The legal framework it helped establish continues to shape U.S. housing policy today, making it a pivotal moment in both real estate law and civil rights history. Retired U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy voiced alarm over the state of American political discourse during a recent international judicial forum, warning that the tone of current debates poses a threat to democracy and freedom. Speaking without directly referencing President Trump, Kennedy criticized the rise of identity politics and emphasized that civil discourse should be about issues, not partisan affiliations. He argued that judges are essential to a functioning democracy and must be protected—both physically and in terms of public respect.Other speakers, including South African jurist Richard Goldstone and U.S. District Judge Esther Salas, echoed Kennedy's concerns. Goldstone condemned personal attacks on judges who ruled against the current administration, while Salas highlighted the growing danger judges face, referencing her own experience with targeted violence and the record-high levels of threats now being reported in the U.S.The event underscored a growing consensus among jurists worldwide: that political attacks on the judiciary undermine democratic institutions and risk eroding the rule of law.Retired US Supreme Court Justice Kennedy warns 'freedom is at risk' | ReutersA federal judge has rejected a joint attempt by Ripple Labs and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to finalize a reduced settlement in their long-running legal battle over unregistered XRP token sales. U.S. District Judge Analisa Torres criticized both parties for proposing a $50 million fine in lieu of a previously imposed $125 million penalty and for attempting to nullify a permanent injunction she had ordered.Judge Torres ruled in 2023 that Ripple's public XRP sales weren't securities, but $728 million in sales to institutional investors violated federal securities laws. While both sides appealed, they later proposed to settle—if the court would cancel the injunction and approve the reduced fine. Torres refused, stating they lacked authority to override a court's final judgment involving a violation of congressional statute.She emphasized that exceptional circumstances justifying the request were not present and that vacating a permanent injunction would undermine the public interest and the administration of justice. The SEC and Ripple still have the option to continue their appeals or drop them entirely.The case is notable amid a broader shift under President Trump's second term, during which the SEC has dropped several high-profile crypto enforcement actions. XRP remains one of the top cryptocurrencies by market value.SEC, Ripple wants to settle crypto lawsuit, but US judge rebuffs them | ReutersThe Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration to move forward with its plan to end automatic birthright citizenship by narrowing the scope of judicial injunctions. Previously, lower courts had issued nationwide injunctions blocking the policy, but the Court ruled these injunctions should apply only to the parties involved in the lawsuits. This means that the policy can now proceed in most states, except those like New Hampshire where separate legal challenges remain in effect. The Court's decision followed ideological lines, with the conservative majority backing the administration and liberal justices dissenting. Justice Amy Coney Barrett, writing for the majority, emphasized that courts must not overreach their authority even when they find executive actions unlawful. In contrast, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson warned the ruling could erode the rule of law by allowing inconsistent application of federal policy across states.The ruling does not address the constitutionality of ending birthright citizenship, leaving that question open for future litigation. The Trump administration's executive order, issued on January 20, 2025, reinterprets the 14th Amendment's Citizenship Clause to exclude children born in the U.S. to non-citizen or non-resident parents. This reinterpretation challenges the longstanding understanding established by the 1898 Supreme Court case United States v. Wong Kim Ark, which confirmed that nearly all individuals born on U.S. soil are citizens. The administration has argued that judges lack the authority to impose broad injunctions and that states challenging the policy lack standing. While the policy remains blocked in certain jurisdictions, the administration can now continue planning for its implementation and potentially face a patchwork of future legal challenges.Supreme Court curbs injunctions that blocked Trump's birthright citizenship planIn a piece I wrote for Forbes yesterday, the Trump administration briefly floated Section 899, a provision dubbed the “revenge tax,” as a retaliatory measure against countries imposing taxes deemed discriminatory toward U.S. companies—particularly tech giants. This measure, hidden within the broader One Big Beautiful Bill Act, proposed punitive tax increases on income earned in the U.S. by individuals and entities linked to “discriminatory foreign countries.” The policy was a response to international developments like the OECD's Pillar 2 framework and digital services taxes (DSTs), which the U.S. perceived as disproportionately targeting American firms.Section 899 would have enabled the Treasury to impose annual 5% tax hikes on everything from dividends to real estate gains, even overriding exemptions for sovereign wealth funds. What made the provision particularly aggressive was its vague triggering criteria—any foreign tax Treasury considered “unfair” could activate the penalties, without congressional oversight.Despite its bold intent, Section 899 was ultimately abandoned. It generated concern among investors and foreign governments alike, with critics warning it would destabilize capital markets and act as an unofficial sanctions regime. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent eventually signaled its withdrawal, citing improved diplomatic relations. Though shelved for now, the idea may resurface if international tax disputes escalate.Section 899—The ‘Revenge Tax' That Didn't SurviveA double dose of me this week, another piece I wrote for Forbes:The Pro Codes Act, currently before Congress as H.R.4072, poses a serious threat to public access to the law by allowing private organizations to retain copyright over technical standards—even after those standards are incorporated by reference into statutes and regulations. Although pitched as a transparency measure, the bill effectively transforms enforceable legal obligations into intellectual property governed by restrictive licenses and online viewer limitations.The Act would require standards to be “publicly accessible,” but this access might mean only being able to view documents behind login walls, with no ability to download, search, or integrate them into legal or compliance tools. This is particularly troubling in areas like tax law, where these standards often form the basis for determining eligibility for deductions or credits.By commodifying access to legal standards, the Pro Codes Act would introduce a two-tiered system: well-resourced firms could pay for commercial access, while small legal clinics, nonprofits, and individuals could find themselves effectively barred from the rules they're legally obligated to follow. The result is an unequal legal landscape where justice becomes contingent on financial capacity.The bill directly undermines a key legal principle reaffirmed by the Supreme Court in 2020: laws and materials carrying the force of law cannot be copyrighted. Permitting private entities to control access to mandatory standards shifts power away from the public and toward entities seeking to monetize compliance.Pro Codes Act—Or, What If The Law Came Behind A Paywall?This week's closing theme is Variations sérieuses, Op. 54 by Felix Mendelssohn—a composer whose elegance, intellect, and structural precision made him one of the early Romantic era's brightest voices. Born into a wealthy, culturally vibrant German-Jewish family in 1809, Mendelssohn was a child prodigy whose musical maturity arrived astonishingly early. He played a pivotal role in reviving J.S. Bach's legacy and was admired for his orchestral works, choral music, and virtuosic piano writing.Composed in 1841, the Variations sérieuses reflect a side of Mendelssohn that is often overshadowed by his lighter, more lyrical pieces. Written as a contribution to a fundraising album for a monument to Beethoven, the work pays tribute to that master's weight and depth. In this set of 17 variations on a solemn original theme, Mendelssohn channels both Classical form and Romantic intensity. The variations begin introspectively but grow in technical difficulty and emotional force, culminating in a stormy, almost defiant finale.Unlike many variation sets of the time, which favored decorative flourishes, Mendelssohn's sérieuses live up to their name: they are dense, architecturally rigorous, and deeply expressive. The piece showcases his command of counterpoint, his sensitivity to dynamic contrasts, and his ability to build drama without sacrificing formal clarity. It's music that demands both interpretive depth and virtuosity—qualities that have kept it central to the serious piano repertoire for over 180 years. Mendelssohn once described music as a language too precise for words, and this piece speaks volumes in that tongue. It is a fitting and focused way to close the week.Without further ado, Variations sérieuses, Op. 54 by Felix Mendelssohn – enjoy! This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

In the case Graves v. Combs et al., 24-cv-07201, attorneys for Sean Combs—joined by co-defendant Joseph Sherman—have submitted a formal request to Judge Torres seeking a stay of the proceedings. The defendants argue that two pending appeals currently before the Second Circuit—Parker v. Alexander (No. 25-487) and Doe v. Black (No. 25-564)—will be determinative of the central legal issues raised in their motions to dismiss (ECF Nos. 52-57). They maintain that the outcomes of these appellate cases are likely to directly impact the viability of the claims brought against them.The defense is asking that this matter be paused until thirty days after the Second Circuit renders decisions in both cited appeals. They note that such a stay would be consistent with the approach taken by the Court in a related matter, English v. Combs et al., 24 Civ. 05090, where Judge Torres granted a similar stay pending resolution of the same appellate questions. The request is presented as a measure of judicial efficiency and fairness, with the goal of avoiding potentially unnecessary litigation should the Second Circuit rulings render some or all of the current claims invalid.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628776.67.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In a recent ruling, Judge Analisa Torres of the U.S. District Court granted the accuser in a high-profile lawsuit against Jay-Z the ability to remain anonymous. The accuser, identified only as "Jane Doe," had filed a lawsuit alleging sexual assault by the rapper and business mogul. Judge Torres acknowledged the significant public interest in the case but determined that the plaintiff's privacy and safety outweighed the need for public disclosure of her identity. The order emphasized the potential risks of harassment, intimidation, and stigma that could arise if her identity were revealed, particularly given Jay-Z's prominence and the heightened media scrutiny surrounding the case.The ruling does not impact the progression of the legal proceedings, as the court will ensure both parties have access to necessary information for a fair trial. However, it sets an important precedent in balancing the rights of accusers in sensitive cases with public transparency. Judge Torres underscored that allowing Jane Doe to proceed anonymously would not prejudice Jay-Z's defense or compromise the integrity of the judicial process.(commercial at 8:42)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630244.53.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Ripple Case BOMBSHELL: Judge Torres Just Shook Up the Settlement! In today's livestream, we break down the latest procedural twist in the Ripple v. SEC saga. Judge Torres has denied the motion, and top legal voices are weighing in. We'll cover key takeaways from Stu Alderoty, Eleanor Terrett's coverage, and what this means for XRP holders moving forward. ********** SUPPORT ON THE CHAIN GRAB A BADASS YETIS COFFEE – Fuel your crypto grind! ☕ Visit: otc.one/BadassYetisBrew MINT YOUR BADASS YETIS NFT – Own a piece of the legend! Visit: otc.one/mint OTC MERCH IS HERE! – Represent the community in style! Visit: onthechain.shop BUY US A COFFEE – Help keep the content flowing! Visit: otc.one/buy-us-a-coffee JOIN THE CHANNEL – Get exclusive perks & behind-the-scenes content! Visit: otc.one/join ********** ON THE CHAIN – CONNECT WITH US! Listen to the OTC Podcast – Never miss an update! Visit: otc.one/podcast Visit Our Website – The home of crypto insights! Visit: onthechain.io Follow OTC on Twitter – Stay updated in real time! Visit: otc.one/otc Join the OTC Community on Twitter – Be part of the discussion! Visit: twitter.com/i/communities/1599435678995062788 ********** FOLLOW THE OTC TEAM Follow Jeff on Twitter:

Crypto News: Coinbase suffers data breach with hackers demanding $20 million in Bitcoin. Mastercard partners with moonpay to expand stablecoin usage. Judge Torres blocks SEC and Ripple in XRP case. Show Sponsor -

Jay-Z's legal team has filed a motion to dismiss a lawsuit accusing the rapper of rape, arguing that the case is based on allegations tainted by "severe" legal misconduct. The accuser, who claims the incident occurred decades ago, gave a public interview that Jay-Z's lawyers contend violates legal norms, potentially prejudicing the case. They argue that the interview and the accuser's public statements were orchestrated to garner publicity and improperly influence the court proceedings. Additionally, Jay-Z's legal team insists that the claims are not only unsubstantiated but also barred by the statute of limitations, rendering the lawsuit legally deficient.The motion highlights the inconsistencies and credibility issues in the accuser's narrative, alleging that her actions undermine the integrity of the legal process. Jay-Z's attorneys also stress that the public nature of her interview disregards legal protocols designed to ensure a fair trial. They maintain that the lawsuit is baseless and represents an abuse of the judicial system, urging the court to dismiss the case promptly. In a recent ruling, Judge Analisa Torres criticized Jay-Z's attorney, Alex Spiro, for his aggressive legal tactics in the ongoing lawsuit where Jay-Z is accused of sexual assault. Judge Torres described Spiro's repeated filings, which included inflammatory language and personal attacks, as inappropriate and a waste of judicial resources. She emphasized that such combative motions are unlikely to benefit his client and stated, "The Court will not fast-track the judicial process merely because counsel demands it."Additionally, Judge Torres denied Spiro's motions to dismiss the lawsuit and to reveal the identity of the plaintiff, who is proceeding under the pseudonym "Jane Doe." She ruled that the plaintiff could remain anonymous at this stage of the litigation, citing the sensitive nature of the allegations and the potential harm to the plaintiff's mental health and safety. This decision underscores the court's commitment to ensuring a fair legal process while protecting the rights of individuals involved in such serious allegations.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Jay-Z's legal team has filed a motion to dismiss a lawsuit accusing the rapper of rape, arguing that the case is based on allegations tainted by "severe" legal misconduct. The accuser, who claims the incident occurred decades ago, gave a public interview that Jay-Z's lawyers contend violates legal norms, potentially prejudicing the case. They argue that the interview and the accuser's public statements were orchestrated to garner publicity and improperly influence the court proceedings. Additionally, Jay-Z's legal team insists that the claims are not only unsubstantiated but also barred by the statute of limitations, rendering the lawsuit legally deficient.The motion highlights the inconsistencies and credibility issues in the accuser's narrative, alleging that her actions undermine the integrity of the legal process. Jay-Z's attorneys also stress that the public nature of her interview disregards legal protocols designed to ensure a fair trial. They maintain that the lawsuit is baseless and represents an abuse of the judicial system, urging the court to dismiss the case promptly. In a recent ruling, Judge Analisa Torres criticized Jay-Z's attorney, Alex Spiro, for his aggressive legal tactics in the ongoing lawsuit where Jay-Z is accused of sexual assault. Judge Torres described Spiro's repeated filings, which included inflammatory language and personal attacks, as inappropriate and a waste of judicial resources. She emphasized that such combative motions are unlikely to benefit his client and stated, "The Court will not fast-track the judicial process merely because counsel demands it."Additionally, Judge Torres denied Spiro's motions to dismiss the lawsuit and to reveal the identity of the plaintiff, who is proceeding under the pseudonym "Jane Doe." She ruled that the plaintiff could remain anonymous at this stage of the litigation, citing the sensitive nature of the allegations and the potential harm to the plaintiff's mental health and safety. This decision underscores the court's commitment to ensuring a fair legal process while protecting the rights of individuals involved in such serious allegations.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

 Judge Analisa Torres of the U.S. District Court granted the accuser in a high-profile lawsuit against Jay-Z the ability to remain anonymous. The accuser, identified only as "Jane Doe," had filed a lawsuit alleging sexual assault by the rapper and business mogul. Judge Torres acknowledged the significant public interest in the case but determined that the plaintiff's privacy and safety outweighed the need for public disclosure of her identity. The order emphasized the potential risks of harassment, intimidation, and stigma that could arise if her identity were revealed, particularly given Jay-Z's prominence and the heightened media scrutiny surrounding the case.The ruling does not impact the progression of the legal proceedings, as the court will ensure both parties have access to necessary information for a fair trial. However, it sets an important precedent in balancing the rights of accusers in sensitive cases with public transparency. Judge Torres underscored that allowing Jane Doe to proceed anonymously would not prejudice Jay-Z's defense or compromise the integrity of the judicial process.In a recent ruling, Judge Analisa Torres criticized Jay-Z's attorney, Alex Spiro, for his aggressive legal tactics in the ongoing lawsuit where Jay-Z is accused of sexual assault. Judge Torres described Spiro's repeated filings, which included inflammatory language and personal attacks, as inappropriate and a waste of judicial resources. She emphasized that such combative motions are unlikely to benefit his client and stated, "The Court will not fast-track the judicial process merely because counsel demands it."Additionally, Judge Torres denied Spiro's motions to dismiss the lawsuit and to reveal the identity of the plaintiff, who is proceeding under the pseudonym "Jane Doe." She ruled that the plaintiff could remain anonymous at this stage of the litigation, citing the sensitive nature of the allegations and the potential harm to the plaintiff's mental health and safety. This decision underscores the court's commitment to ensuring a fair legal process while protecting the rights of individuals involved in such serious allegations.(commercial at 10:06)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource;Judge explodes at Jay-Z in child rape case and rules against rapper after 'relentless' courtroom plot | Daily Mail Onlinesource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630244.53.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

 Judge Analisa Torres of the U.S. District Court granted the accuser in a high-profile lawsuit against Jay-Z the ability to remain anonymous. The accuser, identified only as "Jane Doe," had filed a lawsuit alleging sexual assault by the rapper and business mogul. Judge Torres acknowledged the significant public interest in the case but determined that the plaintiff's privacy and safety outweighed the need for public disclosure of her identity. The order emphasized the potential risks of harassment, intimidation, and stigma that could arise if her identity were revealed, particularly given Jay-Z's prominence and the heightened media scrutiny surrounding the case.The ruling does not impact the progression of the legal proceedings, as the court will ensure both parties have access to necessary information for a fair trial. However, it sets an important precedent in balancing the rights of accusers in sensitive cases with public transparency. Judge Torres underscored that allowing Jane Doe to proceed anonymously would not prejudice Jay-Z's defense or compromise the integrity of the judicial process.In a recent ruling, Judge Analisa Torres criticized Jay-Z's attorney, Alex Spiro, for his aggressive legal tactics in the ongoing lawsuit where Jay-Z is accused of sexual assault. Judge Torres described Spiro's repeated filings, which included inflammatory language and personal attacks, as inappropriate and a waste of judicial resources. She emphasized that such combative motions are unlikely to benefit his client and stated, "The Court will not fast-track the judicial process merely because counsel demands it."Additionally, Judge Torres denied Spiro's motions to dismiss the lawsuit and to reveal the identity of the plaintiff, who is proceeding under the pseudonym "Jane Doe." She ruled that the plaintiff could remain anonymous at this stage of the litigation, citing the sensitive nature of the allegations and the potential harm to the plaintiff's mental health and safety. This decision underscores the court's commitment to ensuring a fair legal process while protecting the rights of individuals involved in such serious allegations.(commercial at 10:06)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource;Judge explodes at Jay-Z in child rape case and rules against rapper after 'relentless' courtroom plot | Daily Mail Onlinesource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630244.53.0.pdf

In a recent ruling, Judge Analisa Torres of the U.S. District Court granted the accuser in a high-profile lawsuit against Jay-Z the ability to remain anonymous. The accuser, identified only as "Jane Doe," had filed a lawsuit alleging sexual assault by the rapper and business mogul. Judge Torres acknowledged the significant public interest in the case but determined that the plaintiff's privacy and safety outweighed the need for public disclosure of her identity. The order emphasized the potential risks of harassment, intimidation, and stigma that could arise if her identity were revealed, particularly given Jay-Z's prominence and the heightened media scrutiny surrounding the case.The ruling does not impact the progression of the legal proceedings, as the court will ensure both parties have access to necessary information for a fair trial. However, it sets an important precedent in balancing the rights of accusers in sensitive cases with public transparency. Judge Torres underscored that allowing Jane Doe to proceed anonymously would not prejudice Jay-Z's defense or compromise the integrity of the judicial process.(commercial at 8:42)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630244.53.0.pdf

In a recent ruling, Judge Analisa Torres criticized Jay-Z's attorney, Alex Spiro, for his aggressive legal tactics in the ongoing lawsuit where Jay-Z is accused of sexual assault. Judge Torres described Spiro's repeated filings, which included inflammatory language and personal attacks, as inappropriate and a waste of judicial resources. She emphasized that such combative motions are unlikely to benefit his client and stated, "The Court will not fast-track the judicial process merely because counsel demands it."Additionally, Judge Torres denied Spiro's motions to dismiss the lawsuit and to reveal the identity of the plaintiff, who is proceeding under the pseudonym "Jane Doe." She ruled that the plaintiff could remain anonymous at this stage of the litigation, citing the sensitive nature of the allegations and the potential harm to the plaintiff's mental health and safety. This decision underscores the court's commitment to ensuring a fair legal process while protecting the rights of individuals involved in such serious allegations.(commercial at 10:06)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource;Judge explodes at Jay-Z in child rape case and rules against rapper after 'relentless' courtroom plot | Daily Mail Online

The courtroom reverberated with tension as Judge Analisa Torres delivered a pivotal ruling that allowed Jane Doe, the woman accusing Sean “Diddy” Combs and Shawn “JAY-Z” Carter of rape, to maintain her anonymity—for now. This decision, coming from the U.S. District Court in the Southern District of New York, sets the stage for what promises to be one of the most contentious legal battles in recent memory. The gravity of this ruling resonates far beyond the immediate parties involved, casting a spotlight on the intersection of celebrity culture, legal ethics, and the ongoing reckoning with sexual assault allegations in high-profile cases. While Jane Doe's identity remains concealed, the allegations at the heart of this case continue to ripple through the worlds of music, law, and public opinion, demanding scrutiny from every angle. The judge's decision, as reported on December 26, 2024, underscores the precarious balance between protecting a victim's privacy and ensuring a fair defense. Jane Doe's legal team argued that revealing her identity could exacerbate her fragile mental health, pointing to her diagnoses of depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, and a seizure disorder—all purportedly linked to the trauma of her alleged assault. Judge Torres acknowledged this, describing Jane Doe as “particularly vulnerable to the possible harms of disclosure.” This recognition reflects a growing awareness within the judicial system about the nuanced needs of survivors. However, the judge also noted that the decision might be revisited as the case unfolds, particularly during the discovery phase when the defendants—and their formidable legal teams—are likely to intensify their efforts to challenge her claims. This potential shift highlights the dynamic nature of such rulings, where the scales of justice are continually recalibrated as new evidence emerges. This ruling comes amidst an already fiery legal clash, marked by sharp exchanges between Jane Doe's attorney, Tony Buzbee, and the high-profile defense lawyers representing JAY-Z and Diddy. Alex Spiro, JAY-Z's lead attorney, has been particularly aggressive in his approach, filing motions described by the court as “combative” and replete with “inflammatory language and ad hominem attacks.” Judge Torres did not mince words in her criticism, calling these tactics “a waste of judicial resources” and cautioning against attempts to fast-track the judicial process. This critique underscores a broader tension within high-stakes litigation, where the zeal to protect a client's interests often collides with the procedural decorum expected in court. At the heart of the case lies a harrowing accusation: Jane Doe alleges that in 2000, at the age of 13, she was raped by both Diddy and JAY-Z at an afterparty for the MTV Video Music Awards. The lawsuit, initially filed in October against Diddy alone, was later amended to include JAY-Z. The claims have been met with vehement denials from both defendants. JAY-Z, through his representatives, has called the allegations a “cynical and calculated attempt to exploit his name and reputation.” Diddy's camp, for its part, has dismissed the case as baseless. Their defenses, though aligned in intent, differ in tone, with JAY-Z's approach characterized by an assertive dismissal and Diddy's marked by a strategic distancing from the claims. Despite the defendants' efforts to discredit her, Jane Doe has remained steadfast in her claims. She acknowledges inconsistencies in certain details of her account but attributes them to the psychological toll of the assault and the passage of time. Her legal team has framed these discrepancies as common among trauma survivors, arguing that they do not undermine the core allegations. This framing is supported by research into trauma memory, which often shows that survivors may struggle with recalling peripheral details while retaining vivid recollections of the central traumatic event. This nuanced understanding of trauma adds a layer of complexity to the case, challenging traditional notions of credibility in the courtroom. Judge Torres's ruling is a temporary victory for Jane Doe, but it also underscores the complexities of navigating such high-profile cases. The anonymity granted to her is not without consequences for the defense, as the judge herself noted. “This may cause prejudice to Defendants, making it more difficult for them to collect the facts necessary to mount a defense,” Torres stated, adding that the balance of interests could shift as the case progresses. This acknowledgment reveals the inherent tension in balancing the rights of all parties involved, where protecting one party's privacy may inadvertently hinder another's ability to defend themselves effectively. The broader implications of this lawsuit extend beyond the courtroom. For the legal community, it highlights the challenges of adjudicating cases involving powerful public figures and historical allegations. For the entertainment industry, it raises uncomfortable questions about accountability and the legacy of some of its most iconic artists. The case has also reignited debates about the ethics of media coverage, with commentators scrutinizing the motivations and methods of all parties involved. The public's response reflects a broader cultural moment, where the pursuit of justice often intersects with the court of public opinion, creating a volatile mix of advocacy, skepticism, and sensationalism. As the legal battle unfolds, the stakes are high for everyone. For Jane Doe, it is a fight for justice and validation in the face of immense scrutiny. For Diddy and JAY-Z, it is a battle to protect their reputations and legacies. And for the public, it is yet another reminder of the enduring complexities of power, privilege, and accountability in the #MeToo era. These complexities are further compounded by the high stakes of this particular case, where the convergence of celebrity, legal strategy, and social movements creates a uniquely charged atmosphere. The next phase of this case will likely be pivotal. Discovery, where both sides will exchange evidence and depose witnesses, could provide critical insights into the veracity of the allegations and the defense strategies. Judge Torres's indication that anonymity could be revisited during this phase adds another layer of uncertainty. This phase will test the resilience of both the plaintiff and the defendants, as well as the public's appetite for transparency and accountability. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, The Menendez Brothers: Quest For Justice, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com 

The courtroom reverberated with tension as Judge Analisa Torres delivered a pivotal ruling that allowed Jane Doe, the woman accusing Sean “Diddy” Combs and Shawn “JAY-Z” Carter of rape, to maintain her anonymity—for now. This decision, coming from the U.S. District Court in the Southern District of New York, sets the stage for what promises to be one of the most contentious legal battles in recent memory. The gravity of this ruling resonates far beyond the immediate parties involved, casting a spotlight on the intersection of celebrity culture, legal ethics, and the ongoing reckoning with sexual assault allegations in high-profile cases. While Jane Doe's identity remains concealed, the allegations at the heart of this case continue to ripple through the worlds of music, law, and public opinion, demanding scrutiny from every angle. The judge's decision, as reported on December 26, 2024, underscores the precarious balance between protecting a victim's privacy and ensuring a fair defense. Jane Doe's legal team argued that revealing her identity could exacerbate her fragile mental health, pointing to her diagnoses of depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, and a seizure disorder—all purportedly linked to the trauma of her alleged assault. Judge Torres acknowledged this, describing Jane Doe as “particularly vulnerable to the possible harms of disclosure.” This recognition reflects a growing awareness within the judicial system about the nuanced needs of survivors. However, the judge also noted that the decision might be revisited as the case unfolds, particularly during the discovery phase when the defendants—and their formidable legal teams—are likely to intensify their efforts to challenge her claims. This potential shift highlights the dynamic nature of such rulings, where the scales of justice are continually recalibrated as new evidence emerges. This ruling comes amidst an already fiery legal clash, marked by sharp exchanges between Jane Doe's attorney, Tony Buzbee, and the high-profile defense lawyers representing JAY-Z and Diddy. Alex Spiro, JAY-Z's lead attorney, has been particularly aggressive in his approach, filing motions described by the court as “combative” and replete with “inflammatory language and ad hominem attacks.” Judge Torres did not mince words in her criticism, calling these tactics “a waste of judicial resources” and cautioning against attempts to fast-track the judicial process. This critique underscores a broader tension within high-stakes litigation, where the zeal to protect a client's interests often collides with the procedural decorum expected in court. At the heart of the case lies a harrowing accusation: Jane Doe alleges that in 2000, at the age of 13, she was raped by both Diddy and JAY-Z at an afterparty for the MTV Video Music Awards. The lawsuit, initially filed in October against Diddy alone, was later amended to include JAY-Z. The claims have been met with vehement denials from both defendants. JAY-Z, through his representatives, has called the allegations a “cynical and calculated attempt to exploit his name and reputation.” Diddy's camp, for its part, has dismissed the case as baseless. Their defenses, though aligned in intent, differ in tone, with JAY-Z's approach characterized by an assertive dismissal and Diddy's marked by a strategic distancing from the claims. Despite the defendants' efforts to discredit her, Jane Doe has remained steadfast in her claims. She acknowledges inconsistencies in certain details of her account but attributes them to the psychological toll of the assault and the passage of time. Her legal team has framed these discrepancies as common among trauma survivors, arguing that they do not undermine the core allegations. This framing is supported by research into trauma memory, which often shows that survivors may struggle with recalling peripheral details while retaining vivid recollections of the central traumatic event. This nuanced understanding of trauma adds a layer of complexity to the case, challenging traditional notions of credibility in the courtroom. Judge Torres's ruling is a temporary victory for Jane Doe, but it also underscores the complexities of navigating such high-profile cases. The anonymity granted to her is not without consequences for the defense, as the judge herself noted. “This may cause prejudice to Defendants, making it more difficult for them to collect the facts necessary to mount a defense,” Torres stated, adding that the balance of interests could shift as the case progresses. This acknowledgment reveals the inherent tension in balancing the rights of all parties involved, where protecting one party's privacy may inadvertently hinder another's ability to defend themselves effectively. The broader implications of this lawsuit extend beyond the courtroom. For the legal community, it highlights the challenges of adjudicating cases involving powerful public figures and historical allegations. For the entertainment industry, it raises uncomfortable questions about accountability and the legacy of some of its most iconic artists. The case has also reignited debates about the ethics of media coverage, with commentators scrutinizing the motivations and methods of all parties involved. The public's response reflects a broader cultural moment, where the pursuit of justice often intersects with the court of public opinion, creating a volatile mix of advocacy, skepticism, and sensationalism. As the legal battle unfolds, the stakes are high for everyone. For Jane Doe, it is a fight for justice and validation in the face of immense scrutiny. For Diddy and JAY-Z, it is a battle to protect their reputations and legacies. And for the public, it is yet another reminder of the enduring complexities of power, privilege, and accountability in the #MeToo era. These complexities are further compounded by the high stakes of this particular case, where the convergence of celebrity, legal strategy, and social movements creates a uniquely charged atmosphere. The next phase of this case will likely be pivotal. Discovery, where both sides will exchange evidence and depose witnesses, could provide critical insights into the veracity of the allegations and the defense strategies. Judge Torres's indication that anonymity could be revisited during this phase adds another layer of uncertainty. This phase will test the resilience of both the plaintiff and the defendants, as well as the public's appetite for transparency and accountability. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, The Menendez Brothers: Quest For Justice, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

In a recent ruling, Judge Analisa Torres criticized Jay-Z's attorney, Alex Spiro, for his aggressive legal tactics in the ongoing lawsuit where Jay-Z is accused of sexual assault. Judge Torres described Spiro's repeated filings, which included inflammatory language and personal attacks, as inappropriate and a waste of judicial resources. She emphasized that such combative motions are unlikely to benefit his client and stated, "The Court will not fast-track the judicial process merely because counsel demands it."Additionally, Judge Torres denied Spiro's motions to dismiss the lawsuit and to reveal the identity of the plaintiff, who is proceeding under the pseudonym "Jane Doe." She ruled that the plaintiff could remain anonymous at this stage of the litigation, citing the sensitive nature of the allegations and the potential harm to the plaintiff's mental health and safety. This decision underscores the court's commitment to ensuring a fair legal process while protecting the rights of individuals involved in such serious allegations.(commercial at 10:06)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource;Judge explodes at Jay-Z in child rape case and rules against rapper after 'relentless' courtroom plot | Daily Mail Online

In a recent ruling, Judge Analisa Torres of the U.S. District Court granted the accuser in a high-profile lawsuit against Jay-Z the ability to remain anonymous. The accuser, identified only as "Jane Doe," had filed a lawsuit alleging sexual assault by the rapper and business mogul. Judge Torres acknowledged the significant public interest in the case but determined that the plaintiff's privacy and safety outweighed the need for public disclosure of her identity. The order emphasized the potential risks of harassment, intimidation, and stigma that could arise if her identity were revealed, particularly given Jay-Z's prominence and the heightened media scrutiny surrounding the case.The ruling does not impact the progression of the legal proceedings, as the court will ensure both parties have access to necessary information for a fair trial. However, it sets an important precedent in balancing the rights of accusers in sensitive cases with public transparency. Judge Torres underscored that allowing Jane Doe to proceed anonymously would not prejudice Jay-Z's defense or compromise the integrity of the judicial process.(commercial at 8:42)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630244.53.0.pdf

Judge Torres condemned Jay-Z's attorney for trying to "fast track the judicial process ...and wasting court time." Jay-Z has been named in a lawsuit filed against him and Sean "Diddy" Combs after a then 13-year-old claims the two sexually assaulted her. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In a recent ruling, Judge Analisa Torres of the U.S. District Court granted the accuser in a high-profile lawsuit against Jay-Z the ability to remain anonymous. The accuser, identified only as "Jane Doe," had filed a lawsuit alleging sexual assault by the rapper and business mogul. Judge Torres acknowledged the significant public interest in the case but determined that the plaintiff's privacy and safety outweighed the need for public disclosure of her identity. The order emphasized the potential risks of harassment, intimidation, and stigma that could arise if her identity were revealed, particularly given Jay-Z's prominence and the heightened media scrutiny surrounding the case.The ruling does not impact the progression of the legal proceedings, as the court will ensure both parties have access to necessary information for a fair trial. However, it sets an important precedent in balancing the rights of accusers in sensitive cases with public transparency. Judge Torres underscored that allowing Jane Doe to proceed anonymously would not prejudice Jay-Z's defense or compromise the integrity of the judicial process.(commercial at 8:42)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630244.53.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In a recent ruling, Judge Analisa Torres criticized Jay-Z's attorney, Alex Spiro, for his aggressive legal tactics in the ongoing lawsuit where Jay-Z is accused of sexual assault. Judge Torres described Spiro's repeated filings, which included inflammatory language and personal attacks, as inappropriate and a waste of judicial resources. She emphasized that such combative motions are unlikely to benefit his client and stated, "The Court will not fast-track the judicial process merely because counsel demands it."Additionally, Judge Torres denied Spiro's motions to dismiss the lawsuit and to reveal the identity of the plaintiff, who is proceeding under the pseudonym "Jane Doe." She ruled that the plaintiff could remain anonymous at this stage of the litigation, citing the sensitive nature of the allegations and the potential harm to the plaintiff's mental health and safety. This decision underscores the court's commitment to ensuring a fair legal process while protecting the rights of individuals involved in such serious allegations.(commercial at 10:06)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource;Judge explodes at Jay-Z in child rape case and rules against rapper after 'relentless' courtroom plot | Daily Mail OnlineBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The courtroom reverberated with tension as Judge Analisa Torres delivered a pivotal ruling that allowed Jane Doe, the woman accusing Sean “Diddy” Combs and Shawn “JAY-Z” Carter of rape, to maintain her anonymity—for now. This decision, coming from the U.S. District Court in the Southern District of New York, sets the stage for what promises to be one of the most contentious legal battles in recent memory. The gravity of this ruling resonates far beyond the immediate parties involved, casting a spotlight on the intersection of celebrity culture, legal ethics, and the ongoing reckoning with sexual assault allegations in high-profile cases. While Jane Doe's identity remains concealed, the allegations at the heart of this case continue to ripple through the worlds of music, law, and public opinion, demanding scrutiny from every angle. The judge's decision, as reported on December 26, 2024, underscores the precarious balance between protecting a victim's privacy and ensuring a fair defense. Jane Doe's legal team argued that revealing her identity could exacerbate her fragile mental health, pointing to her diagnoses of depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, and a seizure disorder—all purportedly linked to the trauma of her alleged assault. Judge Torres acknowledged this, describing Jane Doe as “particularly vulnerable to the possible harms of disclosure.” This recognition reflects a growing awareness within the judicial system about the nuanced needs of survivors. However, the judge also noted that the decision might be revisited as the case unfolds, particularly during the discovery phase when the defendants—and their formidable legal teams—are likely to intensify their efforts to challenge her claims. This potential shift highlights the dynamic nature of such rulings, where the scales of justice are continually recalibrated as new evidence emerges. This ruling comes amidst an already fiery legal clash, marked by sharp exchanges between Jane Doe's attorney, Tony Buzbee, and the high-profile defense lawyers representing JAY-Z and Diddy. Alex Spiro, JAY-Z's lead attorney, has been particularly aggressive in his approach, filing motions described by the court as “combative” and replete with “inflammatory language and ad hominem attacks.” Judge Torres did not mince words in her criticism, calling these tactics “a waste of judicial resources” and cautioning against attempts to fast-track the judicial process. This critique underscores a broader tension within high-stakes litigation, where the zeal to protect a client's interests often collides with the procedural decorum expected in court. At the heart of the case lies a harrowing accusation: Jane Doe alleges that in 2000, at the age of 13, she was raped by both Diddy and JAY-Z at an afterparty for the MTV Video Music Awards. The lawsuit, initially filed in October against Diddy alone, was later amended to include JAY-Z. The claims have been met with vehement denials from both defendants. JAY-Z, through his representatives, has called the allegations a “cynical and calculated attempt to exploit his name and reputation.” Diddy's camp, for its part, has dismissed the case as baseless. Their defenses, though aligned in intent, differ in tone, with JAY-Z's approach characterized by an assertive dismissal and Diddy's marked by a strategic distancing from the claims. Despite the defendants' efforts to discredit her, Jane Doe has remained steadfast in her claims. She acknowledges inconsistencies in certain details of her account but attributes them to the psychological toll of the assault and the passage of time. Her legal team has framed these discrepancies as common among trauma survivors, arguing that they do not undermine the core allegations. This framing is supported by research into trauma memory, which often shows that survivors may struggle with recalling peripheral details while retaining vivid recollections of the central traumatic event. This nuanced understanding of trauma adds a layer of complexity to the case, challenging traditional notions of credibility in the courtroom. Judge Torres's ruling is a temporary victory for Jane Doe, but it also underscores the complexities of navigating such high-profile cases. The anonymity granted to her is not without consequences for the defense, as the judge herself noted. “This may cause prejudice to Defendants, making it more difficult for them to collect the facts necessary to mount a defense,” Torres stated, adding that the balance of interests could shift as the case progresses. This acknowledgment reveals the inherent tension in balancing the rights of all parties involved, where protecting one party's privacy may inadvertently hinder another's ability to defend themselves effectively. The broader implications of this lawsuit extend beyond the courtroom. For the legal community, it highlights the challenges of adjudicating cases involving powerful public figures and historical allegations. For the entertainment industry, it raises uncomfortable questions about accountability and the legacy of some of its most iconic artists. The case has also reignited debates about the ethics of media coverage, with commentators scrutinizing the motivations and methods of all parties involved. The public's response reflects a broader cultural moment, where the pursuit of justice often intersects with the court of public opinion, creating a volatile mix of advocacy, skepticism, and sensationalism. As the legal battle unfolds, the stakes are high for everyone. For Jane Doe, it is a fight for justice and validation in the face of immense scrutiny. For Diddy and JAY-Z, it is a battle to protect their reputations and legacies. And for the public, it is yet another reminder of the enduring complexities of power, privilege, and accountability in the #MeToo era. These complexities are further compounded by the high stakes of this particular case, where the convergence of celebrity, legal strategy, and social movements creates a uniquely charged atmosphere. The next phase of this case will likely be pivotal. Discovery, where both sides will exchange evidence and depose witnesses, could provide critical insights into the veracity of the allegations and the defense strategies. Judge Torres's indication that anonymity could be revisited during this phase adds another layer of uncertainty. This phase will test the resilience of both the plaintiff and the defendants, as well as the public's appetite for transparency and accountability. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, The Menendez Brothers: Quest For Justice, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, The Murder Of Sandra Birchmore, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com

A seismic shift hits crypto markets as Ethereum founder Vitalik Buterin liquidates $360,000 in meme coins, redirecting funds to embattled TornadoCash developers. Meanwhile, an apparent CryptoPunk NFT sale of $56.3M exposed as flash loan manipulation sends shockwaves through the digital art world. As BlackRock officially recognizes Bitcoin as a global monetary alternative, the SEC refuses to back down, appealing Judge Torres's landmark Ripple ruling. Market turbulence intensifies with an Ethereum whale offloading 19,000 ETH while Bitcoin Core rushes to patch critical vulnerabilities affecting one-sixth of all nodes. HOW CAN I SUPPORT YOU ASK? SUBSCRIBE:⁠RARE BITS PODCAST⁠    WATCH: ⁠RAREBITS LIVE YOUTUBE⁠   READ: RARE BITS SUBSTACK⁠  Follow on X: BEATBROKER RARE BITS LIVE GET SOME MERCH RARE BITS GEAR:⁠RARE BITS MERCH⁠

Attorney Fred Rispoli discusses he SEC appealing Judge Torres ruling in the Ripple XRP case lawsuit. Topics:- Goal of the SEC Appeal and Timeline - Chances of SEC and Ripple winning - Ripple Cross Appeal - XRP ETF approval or will the SEC block it? - Crypto regulation impact on the SEC vs Ripple case- Trump vs Harris and Gary Gensler - Can XRP Holders sue the SEC? https://hodllaw.org/ Show Sponsor - ✅ VeChain is a versatile enterprise-grade L1 smart contract platform https://www.vechain.org/

Crypto News: The SEC & Gary Gensler have filed a Notice of Appeal of Judge Torres's Ruling in the Ripple XRP case lawsuit. This may mean the XRP ETF is DOA. Gurbir S. Grewal, SEC Director of the Division of Enforcement, is quitting.Show Sponsor - ⭐️ Learn about BitGo, one of the top crypto custodians - https://www.bitgo.com/ 

// Merlin - SIGN UP FREE 30 DAY TRIAL https://tinyurl.com/MerlinGMCYouTube //// T H E 3 T W A R R I O R A C A D E M Y // Join the 3T Warrior Academy: https://3twarrior.com/warrioracademy?affiliate_id=3827481 // Join our Free Discord: https://3twarrior.com/discord49541345 //// F O L L O W T H E T E A M // Official Good Morning Crypto https://linktr.ee/3tGMCrypto Twitter: https://twitter.com/3tGMCrypto // Abs  Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/Abs3t/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/AbsGMCrypto // Johnny Krypto https://linktr.ee/johnnykrypto Twitter: https://twitter.com/JohnnyKrypto00 YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCm-qyQNf1rnUaw6u20mKCVw // Gonzo Twitter: https://twitter.com/gonzo_3t Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/gonzo_3t/ // Mario | Node Defender https://linktr.ee/LinkWithMario Twitter: https://twitter.com/LinkWithMario Youtube: https://youtube.com/@LinkWithMario Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/LinkWithMario/ TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@LinkWithMario // Andrew Cashflow Website: https://www.andrewcashflow.com/ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/andrewcashflow/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/AndrewCashflow YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@andrewcashflow // NFTtones: https://linktr.ee/NFTtones //// Disclaimer: All of our videos are strictly personal opinions. Please make sure to do your own research. Never take one person's opinion for financial guidance. There are multiple strategies and not all strategies fit all people. Our videos ARE NOT financial advice. We are not financial advisers & this is not financial advice. #Crypto #CryptoNews #Bitcoin #BTC #ethereum #eth #ripple #xrp #chainlink #quant #polygon #qnt #cardano #xlm #hbar #cspr #algo #algorand #cspr #Abs #JohnnyKrypto #GoodMorningCrypto #stellar #fednow #ada #digitalcurrency #digitalassets #tokenization #ada #hbar #hedera #usdc #usdt #jennax #ripplewin #xdc #xinfin #rippleceo #bradgarlinghouse #nft #nfts #xrppump #chainlinks #swift #tokenizedassets #xrpltokenization #uphold #coinbase #visa #fidelity #bitcoinetf #micklexrp #xrpmickle #mickle #ripplepartnership Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In crypto news today Judge Jackson hands SEC a big loss in the Binance BNB case and validates Judge Torres ruling in the SEC Ripple XRP case. SEC sues MetaMask over staking service. The SCOTUS ruling overturning Chevron, reads as if written specifically with the SEC in mind. Solana ETF filed by VanEck and 21 Shares.

When she was nine years old, Xiomara Torres fled the civil war in her home country of El Salvador and came to the U.S. As a child, she adjusted to her new life in East Los Angeles before she was removed from her family and put into foster care—where she spent six years of her life moving from home to home. Now, she's the subject of a local play in Oregon titled, "Judge Torres." In this edition of “How I Made It,” Judge Torres shares how she overcame the hurdles of the foster system and made her way to the Oregon Circuit Court.This episode originally aired in 2019.

Attorney John Deaton joins me to discuss:- Judge Torres denying the SEC's Appeal attempt of the Ripple XRP ruling- LBRY appeal- SEC vs Coinbase- SEC vs Binance- SEC losing to Grayscale- SEC Gurbir Grewal and Bill Hinman Ethereum speechJohn's book https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0CJH7S4RM?ref_=cm_sw_r_mwn_dp_FRKZFJF576JXMKTZQ3B0

In crypto news today Judge Torres denies the SEC appeal of the Ripple XRP ruling. Ripple gets license in Singapore. Big updates with SEC vs Coinbase and Binance lawsuits.

The Securities and Exchanges Commission (SEC) has been dealt another loss in the courts of the United States with District Judge Analisa Torres denying an appeal of the XRP decision that found the sale of XRP tokens on exchanges is not a security. "The SEC misconstrues the Court's holdings," Judge Torres said, indicating the lawyers at the SEC are either too biased or too incompetent when it comes to crypto.

After three years of legal battles Judge Torres ruled that secondary sales of XRP do not constitute security offerings. This is a landmark moment in crypto, but where does that leave us? What's going on with XRP and Ripple? And most importantly, what does all of this mean for the XRP Army as we look to the future and the next crypto bull run? Interested in Crypto Retirement Accounts? Check out iTrust Capital! ➡️ https://itrust.capital/Bitboy

In crypto news today the SEC and Gary Gensler want to appeal the Ripple XRP ruling from Judge Torres. Google Cloud is plotting more Web3-focused products to make its computing offerings the first choice for industry firms and developers. Interoperability protocol Rarimo is making Polygon ID, a verifiable credential infrastructure, available across multiple blockchains.

XRP isn't itself a security; it depends on how it's sold. So said a federal judge last Thursday in the SEC vs. Ripple case and the implications are significant. Jake Chervinsky, chief policy officer at the Blockchain Association, and lawyer Kayvan Sadeghi, partner at Jenner & Block, join the show to discuss two major ramifications. One: U.S. District Judge Analisa Torres dealt a major blow to the legal theory underpinning the SEC's case against Coinbase. Two: This order really “lights a fire” under U.S. lawmakers to act on a pair of crypto bills in Congress. Listen to the episode on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Overcast, Podcast Addict, Pocket Casts, Stitcher, Castbox, Google Podcasts, Amazon Music, or on your favorite podcast platform. Show highlights: why this is an “extraordinary victory” for the industry, according to Jake whether Judge Torres made the right decision how the SEC could seek an interlocutory appeal to halt the case, though it's unlikely what are the pending items in the case that need to be resolved why the order that Judge Torres issued is not a final judgment why it is more important to look at the transaction, not at the nature of the asset, to determine whether something should be deemed a security whether the SEC has the authority to call digital assets securities the significance of the “major questions doctrine” how the order in the Ripple case will affect other cases like the Coinbase one whether exchanges should re-list XRP why this case could be instrumental in steering the direction of crypto regulation in the U.S. whether other crypto tokens like SOL or MATIC should feel relieved with this new ruling why Jake says that this case will speed up the chances of crypto legislation getting passed what the differences are between the current crypto bills that are being proposed whether SEC Chair Gary Gensler should recuse himself from enforcement actions in the crypto industry Thank you to our sponsors! Crypto.com Arbitrum Foundation TOKEN2049 Guests: Jake Chervinsky, chief policy officer at the Blockchain Association Previous appearances on Unchained: The Chopping Block: Jake Chervinsky on How the SEC Has Lost Credibility All Things Crypto Regulation With Jake Chervinsky Everything You Need to Know About the Looming Battle Over Privacy in Crypto Can Crypto Be a Force in the Midterms? Yes, Say Kristin Smith and Jake Chervinsky Kayvan Sadeghi, partner at Jenner & Block and co-chair of the fintech and crypto assets practice. Links: Previous coverage of Unchained on the Ripple case:  New Order in SEC vs. Ripple Over XRP Is a Win for Crypto: What Happens Now? The Chopping Block: Should XRP Holders Really Be Rejoicing? The SEC's Lawsuit Against Ripple and 2 Execs: What You Need to Know  Ripple's XRP: Why Its Chances of Success Are Low SEC vs Ripple: Judge Rules XRP Sold on Exchanges Is Not a Security CoinDesk: Ripple, Crypto Industry Score Partial Win in SEC Court Fight Over XRP Ripple Labs Ruling Throws U.S. Crypto-Token Regulation into Disarray The Washington Post: Ripple ruling threatens SEC's crypto regulation push Chair Gensler Must Recuse Himself From Digital Asset Enforcement Decisions - Blockchain Association Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

XRP isn't itself a security; it depends on how it's sold. So said a federal judge last Thursday in the SEC vs. Ripple case and the implications are significant. Jake Chervinsky, chief policy officer at the Blockchain Association, and lawyer Kayvan Sadeghi, partner at Jenner & Block, join the show to discuss two major ramifications. One: U.S. District Judge Analisa Torres dealt a major blow to the legal theory underpinning the SEC's case against Coinbase. Two: This order really “lights a fire” under U.S. lawmakers to act on a pair of crypto bills in Congress. Listen to the episode on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Overcast, Podcast Addict, Pocket Casts, Stitcher, Castbox, Google Podcasts, Amazon Music, or on your favorite podcast platform. Show highlights: why this is an “extraordinary victory” for the industry, according to Jake whether Judge Torres made the right decision how the SEC could seek an interlocutory appeal to halt the case, though it's unlikely what are the pending items in the case that need to be resolved why the order that Judge Torres issued is not a final judgment why it is more important to look at the transaction, not at the nature of the asset, to determine whether something should be deemed a security whether the SEC has the authority to call digital assets securities the significance of the “major questions doctrine” how the order in the Ripple case will affect other cases like the Coinbase one whether exchanges should re-list XRP why this case could be instrumental in steering the direction of crypto regulation in the U.S. whether other crypto tokens like SOL or MATIC should feel relieved with this new ruling why Jake says that this case will speed up the chances of crypto legislation getting passed what the differences are between the current crypto bills that are being proposed whether SEC Chair Gary Gensler should recuse himself from enforcement actions in the crypto industry Thank you to our sponsors! Crypto.com Arbitrum Foundation TOKEN2049 Guests: Jake Chervinsky, chief policy officer at the Blockchain Association Previous appearances on Unchained: The Chopping Block: Jake Chervinsky on How the SEC Has Lost Credibility All Things Crypto Regulation With Jake Chervinsky Everything You Need to Know About the Looming Battle Over Privacy in Crypto Can Crypto Be a Force in the Midterms? Yes, Say Kristin Smith and Jake Chervinsky Kayvan Sadeghi, partner at Jenner & Block and co-chair of the fintech and crypto assets practice. Links: Previous coverage of Unchained on the Ripple case:  New Order in SEC vs. Ripple Over XRP Is a Win for Crypto: What Happens Now? The Chopping Block: Should XRP Holders Really Be Rejoicing? The SEC's Lawsuit Against Ripple and 2 Execs: What You Need to Know  Ripple's XRP: Why Its Chances of Success Are Low SEC vs Ripple: Judge Rules XRP Sold on Exchanges Is Not a Security CoinDesk: Ripple, Crypto Industry Score Partial Win in SEC Court Fight Over XRP Ripple Labs Ruling Throws U.S. Crypto-Token Regulation into Disarray The Washington Post: Ripple ruling threatens SEC's crypto regulation push Chair Gensler Must Recuse Himself From Digital Asset Enforcement Decisions - Blockchain Association Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

*SUPPORT ON THE CHAIN* *BADASS YETIS* GET A BADASS YETIS NFT https://otc.one/mint-badass-yetis GET BADASS YETIS COFFEE https://otc.one/BadassYetisBrew -------------- JOIN THE CHANNEL https://otc.one/join OTC MERCH https://onthechain.shop Support ON THE CHAIN https://otc.one/support -------------- *ON THE CHAIN* SUBSCRIBE TO THE OTC PODCAST: https://otc.one/podcast On The Web: https://onthechain.io Follow OTC on Twitter: https://otc.one/otc Join On The Chain Community on Twitter https://twitter.com/i/communities/1599435678995062788 -------------- *JEFF* Follow Jeff on Twitter: https://otc.one/jeff -------------- *CHIP* Follow Chip on Twitter: https://otc.one/chip Listen to Chip's music http://nojoyyet.com​ -------------- *DISCLAIMER:* _All opinions expressed by content contributors that appear on OTC are solely expressing their opinions and do not reflect the opinions of OTC, its affiliates, or sponsors. Content contributors may have previously disseminated information on a social media platform, website, or another medium such as a podcast, television, or radio. OTC, Content Contributors, Affiliates, or Sponsors are not obligated to update or correct any information. The content contributors are sharing the information which they believe to be reliable. OTC, its affiliates, or sponsors cannot guarantee the accuracy of the opinion shared, and viewers, readers, and listeners should not rely on it. Opinions expressed are not financial advice. Please consult a licensed financial advisor before making any financial decisions. You must research before you invest in anything. Do not invest based on what someone else is doing or not doing, or based on other people's opinions._ #XRP #Ripple #cryptocurrency #news

The SEC and Ripple have been locked in a legal tug of war for years, stirring up waves of controversy and debate in the crypto community. Finally, Judge Analisa Torres has given an order establishing that XRP buyers trading on exchanges were not, in fact, engaging in a securities transaction, a decision that could have far-reaching implications for the industry. Lewis Cohen, co-founder of DLx Law, unpacks the details of this pivotal case and what it might mean for the future of cryptocurrency regulation. Listen to the episode on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Overcast, Podcast Addict, Pocket Casts, Stitcher, Castbox, Google Podcasts, Amazon Music, or on your favorite podcast platform. Show highlights: why the SEC lawsuit against Ripple has such historical significance in the crypto industry how Judge Torres split the case into two categories  why the 'programmatic buyers' did not meet the four prongs of the Howey test why the institutional sales constituted an investment contract  what makes the Ripple case different from the Kik and Telegram cases whether the new ruling by Judge Torres will have an impact on how other crypto projects deal with their offerings why, in the event of an appeal, Lewis expects a Second Circuit decision to take at least one year whether Judge Torres' decision will impact the ongoing cases against crypto exchanges like Coinbase why Lewis thinks the XRP order will not change the likelihood that spot bitcoin ETFs get approved how there's no way to deal with information asymmetries in digital assets now Thank you to our sponsors! Crypto.com Railgun DAO Ondo Finance Arbitrum Foundation Guest Lewis Cohen, Cofounder DLx Law Previous appearances on Unchained: The Lummis/Gillibrand Crypto Bill: Is the ‘Ancillary Token' Approach the Best Links Previous coverage of Unchained on the Ripple case:  The SEC's Lawsuit Against Ripple and 2 Execs: What You Need to Know  Ripple's XRP: Why Its Chances of Success Are Low CoinDesk: Ripple, Crypto Industry Score Partial Win in SEC Court Fight Over XRP The Ineluctable Modality of Securities Law: Why Fungible Crypto Assets Are not Securities Paradigm Files Amicus Brief in SEC's Lawsuit Against Ripple The Block: Lummis, Gillibrand to introduce revised comprehensive crypto bill  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Attorney Fred Rispoli joins me to breakdown Ripple's victory in the SEC XRP lawsuit. We discuss the Judge Torres ruling, Coinbase and exchanges relisting XRP, crypto industry using Ripple's victory for defense, can the SEC appeal, and can the California lawsuit overturn Judge Torres ruling and much more.

A New York court ruled on Thursday that Ripple's sale of XRP tokens on exchanges and through algorithms does not constitute an investment contract, but that the institutional sale of tokens violates federal securities laws. Judge Torres said that Ripple's Programmatic Sales, other distributions and XRP sales of Larsen and Garlinghouse do not constitute investment contracts.

On this day in history, July 14 1798, Congress passed the Sedition Act. The Sedition Act of 1798 was a controversial law that criminalized the propagation of false or defamatory statements against the federal government. It was primarily deployed as a tool by the Adams administration to control dissenting speech, especially from the Jeffersonian press that took issue with the ideologies of the Federalist Party. Interestingly, the Act did not cover criticism aimed at the Vice President, a position held by Thomas Jefferson at the time, due to his adversarial stance against the Federalist-dominant Congress. In 1800, the Sedition Act was deliberately left to lapse, marking its end. The introduction and enforcement of this Act is believed to have played a significant role in Thomas Jefferson's victory in the presidential election the same year, as public sentiment turned against the suppression of free speech.A ruling by U.S. District Judge Analisa Torres found that Ripple Labs Inc.'s token, XRP, constitutes a security when sold to institutional investors, but not when sold to the general public. Judge Torres reasoned that sophisticated investors would perceive XRP as a speculative investment with potential for returns, aligning it with the definition of an investment contract under federal securities law. This did not hold for the broader public purchasing on crypto exchanges, given the lack of evidence that such investors would fully comprehend Ripple's numerous statements about XRP. The decision, viewed as a win for the crypto industry, sent XRP's value soaring and sparked a wider debate on the classification of cryptocurrencies as securities. However, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) maintains that XRP tokens were sold as investment contracts in violation of securities laws. The impact of this ruling could significantly limit the SEC's jurisdiction, particularly if adopted by other courts. Despite the mixed verdict, the SEC's case against Ripple on institutional-sales claims will continue.Ripple Tokens Sold to Public Are Not Securities, Judge Says (1)Ripple Labs notches landmark win in SEC case over XRP cryptocurrency | ReutersWalt Disney Co is seeking the dismissal of a lawsuit by the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District as part of its ongoing conflict with Florida Governor Ron DeSantis. The lawsuit aims to nullify deals the district alleges were illegally made in favor of Disney with a previous district board. Meanwhile, Disney has its own lawsuit against Governor DeSantis, accusing him of leveraging state government against the company in response to its opposition to a Florida law prohibiting classroom discussions of sexuality and gender identity with younger children. In retaliation, DeSantis influenced the passage of bills that restructured the district, transferring board control to the governor and retroactively invalidating agreements Disney had made with the previous board. Disney argues the district's lawsuit should be dismissed since the company's agreements were already nullified by the state. This would enable Disney to concentrate on its federal case, which alleges DeSantis violated the company's right to free speech. The oversight district, however, wants its case to proceed, arguing that if the Disney agreements are invalidated, Disney's federal case claims will largely be undermined.Disney seeks to toss district lawsuit in DeSantis feud | ReutersThe IRS is intensifying its enforcement efforts against wealthy tax evaders, utilizing the funding provided in the Inflation Reduction Act, also known as the tax-and-climate law, according to Commissioner Danny Werfel. Recent actions include resolving around 175 tax delinquency cases for millionaires, yielding $38 million, and initiating measures against millionaires who do not file tax returns. The agency has also identified roughly 100 high-income individuals claiming benefits in Puerto Rico without satisfying certain criteria. Werfel emphasized that the IRS plans to use the funds to pursue delinquent millionaires more vigorously and to crack down on those employing abusive tax strategies. Furthermore, he outlined the agency's efforts to improve taxpayer services, including opening new taxpayer assistance centers and expanding online capabilities. Despite receiving $80 billion from the law, these funds might be cut to $60 billion due to a debt-limit agreement. Werfel warned against any further cuts, stating that they would impact the agency's enforcement and customer service abilities.IRS Targets Rich Tax Dodgers Using New Funds, Chief Werfel SaysTwitter Inc has been accused of refusing to pay a minimum of $500 million in promised severance to thousands of employees laid off after Elon Musk acquired the company, according to a lawsuit filed by Courtney McMillian, the former head of Twitter's employee benefits programs. McMillian alleges that a severance plan created by Twitter in 2019 promised most workers two months of their base pay plus an additional week of pay for each full year of service if they were laid off. Senior employees were supposed to receive six months of base pay. However, McMillian asserts that Twitter only provided at most one month of severance pay to laid-off workers, with many not receiving anything. The lawsuit accuses Twitter and Musk of violating a federal law regulating employee benefit plans. In response to these claims, Twitter stated that it has paid ex-employees in full. The company is also facing other lawsuits relating to the layoffs, including allegations of targeting women and workers with disabilities.Twitter owes ex-employees $500 million in severance, lawsuit claims | Reuters Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

XRP - JOHN DEATON LIVE - Judge Torres Ruling - XRP NOT a Security *SUPPORT ON THE CHAIN* *BADASS YETIS* GET A BADASS YETIS NFT https://otc.one/mint-badass-yetis GET BADASS YETIS COFFEE https://otc.one/BadassYetisBrew -------------- JOIN THE CHANNEL https://otc.one/join OTC MERCH https://onthechain.shop Support ON THE CHAIN https://otc.one/support -------------- *ON THE CHAIN* SUBSCRIBE TO THE OTC PODCAST: https://otc.one/podcast On The Web: https://onthechain.io Follow OTC on Twitter: https://otc.one/otc Join On The Chain Community on Twitter https://twitter.com/i/communities/1599435678995062788 -------------- *JEFF* Follow Jeff on Twitter: https://otc.one/jeff -------------- *CHIP* Follow Chip on Twitter: https://otc.one/chip Listen to Chip's music http://nojoyyet.com​ -------------- *DISCLAIMER:* _All opinions expressed by content contributors that appear on OTC are solely expressing their opinions and do not reflect the opinions of OTC, its affiliates, or sponsors. Content contributors may have previously disseminated information on a social media platform, website, or another medium such as a podcast, television, or radio. OTC, Content Contributors, Affiliates, or Sponsors are not obligated to update or correct any information. The content contributors are sharing the information which they believe to be reliable. OTC, its affiliates, or sponsors cannot guarantee the accuracy of the opinion shared, and viewers, readers, and listeners should not rely on it. Opinions expressed are not financial advice. Please consult a licensed financial advisor before making any financial decisions. You must research before you invest in anything. Do not invest based on what someone else is doing or not doing, or based on other people's opinions._ #XRP #Ripple #cryptocurrency #news

XRP claimed a MASSIVE victory today against the SEC as Judge Torres ruled that XRP is NOT a security! What does this mean for XRP and Cryptocurrency as a whole? This could be extremely bullish and also help pave the way to mass adoption! In this livestream I will be doing live TA on XRP, Bitcoin and all of your favorite altcoins!! At the end of the stream we will spin the wheel of pain & pleasure, giving you a chance to win some crypto or merch!

The SEC and Ripple have been locked in a legal tug of war for years, stirring up waves of controversy and debate in the crypto community. Finally, Judge Analisa Torres has given an order establishing that XRP buyers trading on exchanges were not, in fact, engaging in a securities transaction, a decision that could have far-reaching implications for the industry. Lewis Cohen, co-founder of DLx Law, unpacks the details of this pivotal case and what it might mean for the future of cryptocurrency regulation. Listen to the episode on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Overcast, Podcast Addict, Pocket Casts, Stitcher, Castbox, Google Podcasts, Amazon Music, or on your favorite podcast platform. Show highlights: why the SEC lawsuit against Ripple has such historical significance in the crypto industry how Judge Torres split the case into two categories  why the 'programmatic buyers' did not meet the four prongs of the Howey test why the institutional sales constituted an investment contract  what makes the Ripple case different from the Kik and Telegram cases whether the new ruling by Judge Torres will have an impact on how other crypto projects deal with their offerings why, in the event of an appeal, Lewis expects a Second Circuit decision to take at least one year whether Judge Torres' decision will impact the ongoing cases against crypto exchanges like Coinbase why Lewis thinks the XRP order will not change the likelihood that spot bitcoin ETFs get approved how there's no way to deal with information asymmetries in digital assets now Thank you to our sponsors! Crypto.com Railgun DAO Ondo Finance Arbitrum Foundation Guest Lewis Cohen, Cofounder DLx Law Previous appearances on Unchained: The Lummis/Gillibrand Crypto Bill: Is the ‘Ancillary Token' Approach the Best Links Previous coverage of Unchained on the Ripple case:  The SEC's Lawsuit Against Ripple and 2 Execs: What You Need to Know  Ripple's XRP: Why Its Chances of Success Are Low CoinDesk: Ripple, Crypto Industry Score Partial Win in SEC Court Fight Over XRP The Ineluctable Modality of Securities Law: Why Fungible Crypto Assets Are not Securities Paradigm Files Amicus Brief in SEC's Lawsuit Against Ripple The Block: Lummis, Gillibrand to introduce revised comprehensive crypto bill  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

XRP - Judge Torres Ruling - BAD NEWS for XRP Investors *SUPPORT ON THE CHAIN* *BADASS YETIS* GET A BADASS YETIS NFT https://otc.one/mint-badass-yetis GET BADASS YETIS COFFEE https://otc.one/BadassYetisBrew -------------- JOIN THE CHANNEL https://otc.one/join OTC MERCH https://onthechain.shop Support ON THE CHAIN https://otc.one/support -------------- *ON THE CHAIN* SUBSCRIBE TO THE OTC PODCAST: https://otc.one/podcast On The Web: https://onthechain.io Follow OTC on Twitter: https://otc.one/otc Join On The Chain Community on Twitter https://twitter.com/i/communities/1599435678995062788 -------------- *JEFF* Follow Jeff on Twitter: https://otc.one/jeff -------------- *CHIP* Follow Chip on Twitter: https://otc.one/chip Listen to Chip's music http://nojoyyet.com​ -------------- *DISCLAIMER:* _All opinions expressed by content contributors that appear on OTC are solely expressing their opinions and do not reflect the opinions of OTC, its affiliates, or sponsors. Content contributors may have previously disseminated information on a social media platform, website, or another medium such as a podcast, television, or radio. OTC, Content Contributors, Affiliates, or Sponsors are not obligated to update or correct any information. The content contributors are sharing the information which they believe to be reliable. OTC, its affiliates, or sponsors cannot guarantee the accuracy of the opinion shared, and viewers, readers, and listeners should not rely on it. Opinions expressed are not financial advice. Please consult a licensed financial advisor before making any financial decisions. You must research before you invest in anything. Do not invest based on what someone else is doing or not doing, or based on other people's opinions._ #XRP #Ripple #cryptocurrency #news

In crypto news today Former SEC Chair Jay Clayton says Bitcoin spot etfs should be approved, investigation into Prometheum has been launched, Standard Chartered Bank issues bitcoin price prediction, and when will Judge Torres rule in the Ripple XRP lawsuit.

Attorney Fred Rispoli is the founder of HODL law. In this interview we discuss Judge Torres denying the SEC's motion to block the Bill Hinman documents, Summary Judgement and conclusion of the SEC Ripple XRP lawsuit, and Coinbase suing the SEC.

XRP - Ripple the SEC - Hinman Emails and Judge Torres BIG Decision *SUPPORT ON THE CHAIN* JOIN THE CHANNEL https://otc.one/join OTC MERCH https://onthechain.shop BUY US A COFFEE https://otc.one/buy-us-a-coffee Support ON THE CHAIN https://otc.one/support -------------- *ON THE CHAIN* SUBSCRIBE TO THE OTC PODCAST: https://otc.one/podcast Subscribe to our other Youtube Channel: https://otc.one/onthechain On The Web: https://onthechain.io Follow OTC on Twitter: https://otc.one/otc Join On The Chain Community on Twitter https://twitter.com/i/communities/1599435678995062788 Join our FREE Telegram Roundtable channel: https://t.me/onthechain_roundtable -------------- *JEFF* Follow Jeff on Twitter: https://otc.one/jeff -------------- *CHIP* Follow Chip on Twitter: https://otc.one/chip Listen to Chip's music http://nojoyyet.com​ -------------- *DISCLAIMER:* _All opinions expressed by content contributors that appear on OTC are solely expressing their opinions and do not reflect the opinions of OTC, its affiliates, or sponsors. Content contributors may have previously disseminated information on a social media platform, website, or another medium such as a podcast, television, or radio. OTC, Content Contributors, Affiliates, or Sponsors are not obligated to update or correct any information. The content contributors are sharing the information which they believe to be reliable. OTC, its affiliates, or sponsors cannot guarantee the accuracy of the opinion shared, and viewers, readers, and listeners should not rely on it. Opinions expressed are not financial advice. Please consult a licensed financial advisor before making any financial decisions. You must research before you invest in anything. Do not invest based on what someone else is doing or not doing, or based on other people's opinions._ #XRP #Ripple #cryptocurrency #news

In crypto news today Judge Torres denies the SEC's Motion to Seal the Bill Hinman documents in the Ripple XRP lawsuit. Ledger wallet makes big update to recovery.

XRP - Ripple - That Time Judge Torres Ruled Against the SEC - Red Team is Talking Crypto Regs - More Bank Failures? *Rules for Giveaways on Our YouTube Channel* https://onthechain.io/rules-for-giveaways-on-our-youtube-channel/ *SUPPORT ON THE CHAIN* JOIN THE CHANNEL https://otc.one/join OTC MERCH https://onthechain.shop BUY US A COFFEE https://otc.one/buy-us-a-coffee Support ON THE CHAIN https://otc.one/support -------------- *ON THE CHAIN* SUBSCRIBE TO THE OTC PODCAST: https://otc.one/podcast Subscribe to our other Youtube Channel: https://otc.one/onthechain On The Web: https://onthechain.io Follow OTC on Twitter: https://otc.one/otc Join On The Chain Community on Twitter https://twitter.com/i/communities/1599435678995062788 Join our FREE Telegram Roundtable channel: https://t.me/onthechain_roundtable -------------- *JEFF* Follow Jeff on Twitter: https://otc.one/jeff -------------- *CHIP* Follow Chip on Twitter: https://otc.one/chip Listen to Chip's music http://nojoyyet.com​ -------------- *DISCLAIMER:* _All opinions expressed by content contributors that appear on OTC are solely expressing their opinions and do not reflect the opinions of OTC, its affiliates, or sponsors. Content contributors may have previously disseminated information on a social media platform, website, or another medium such as a podcast, television, or radio. OTC, Content Contributors, Affiliates, or Sponsors are not obligated to update or correct any information. The content contributors are sharing the information which they believe to be reliable. OTC, its affiliates, or sponsors cannot guarantee the accuracy of the opinion shared, and viewers, readers, and listeners should not rely on it. Opinions expressed are not financial advice. Please consult a licensed financial advisor before making any financial decisions. You must research before you invest in anything. Do not invest based on what someone else is doing or not doing, or based on other people's opinions._ #XRP #Ripple #cryptocurrency #news

SEC v Ripple - XRP: Petition to Intervene - Access to Hinman Emails - Lawyer for Roselyn Layton to Judge Torres TONIGHT ON THE CHAIN - HEAR LIVE FROM Carl Cecere Attorney for Roslyn Layton. Roslyn Layton, attorney, Carl Cecere petitioned court to intervene in the SEC v Ripple Legal Case asking the Court for access to a set of internal SEC documents relating to a speech that former SEC Director of Corporation Finance William Hinman gave June 2018 *** *SUPPORT ON THE CHAIN* JOIN THE CHANNEL https://otc.one/join OTC MERCH https://onthechain.shop BUY US A COFFEE https://otc.one/buy-us-a-coffee Support ON THE CHAIN https://otc.one/support -------------- *ON THE CHAIN* SUBSCRIBE TO THE OTC PODCAST: https://otc.one/podcast Subscribe to our other Youtube Channel: https://otc.one/onthechain On The Web: https://onthechain.io Follow OTC on Twitter: https://otc.one/otc Join On The Chain Community on Twitter https://twitter.com/i/communities/1599435678995062788 Join our FREE Telegram Roundtable channel: https://t.me/onthechain_roundtable -------------- *JEFF* Follow Jeff on Twitter: https://otc.one/jeff -------------- *CHIP* Follow Chip on Twitter: https://otc.one/chip Listen to Chip's music http://nojoyyet.com​ -------------- *DISCLAIMER:* _All opinions expressed by content contributors that appear on OTC are solely expressing their opinions and do not reflect the opinions of OTC, its affiliates, or sponsors. Content contributors may have previously disseminated information on a social media platform, website, or another medium such as a podcast, television, or radio. OTC, Content Contributors, Affiliates, or Sponsors are not obligated to update or correct any information. The content contributors are sharing the information which they believe to be reliable. OTC, its affiliates, or sponsors cannot guarantee the accuracy of the opinion shared, and viewers, readers, and listeners should not rely on it. Opinions expressed are not financial advice. Please consult a licensed financial advisor before making any financial decisions. You must research before you invest in anything. Do not invest based on what someone else is doing or not doing or based on other people's opinions._ #XRP #Ripple

Kevin O'Leary says Gary Gensler stopped him from getting FTX bailed out. Judge Torres approvals the majority of Ripple Amicus Briefs in the XRP lawsuit.

Eleanor Terrett is a Journalist at Fox Business who has been covering the SEC Ripple XRP lawsuit. In this interview we discuss her research, the big updates in the lawsuit, Judge Torres telling the SEC to hand over the Hinman documents, multiple amicus briefs filed, Bill Hinman conflicts of interest, settlement and outcome in the lawsuit, and much more.

Keith and C-Mac break down the Yankees' mini sweep of the rival Red Sox, who are really down bad of late. Just days after seemingly hitting rock bottom on Derek Jeter's Hall of Fame night, the Yanks are back on track with precious breathing room in the AL East. Plus, differing beliefs on who should be the team's game one starter come October. To learn more about listener data and our privacy practices visit: https://www.audacyinc.com/privacy-policy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit https://podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The Yankees offense explodes again, as Rizzo, Stanton, Judge & Torres all homer. 

Goldman Sachs has offered its first Bitcoin backed loan. Panama approved Bitcoin and crypto law. JPMorgan's crypto veteran Christine Moy joins investment firm Apollo. Judge Torres has updated the timeline in the SEC Ripple XRP lawsuit. New regulation proposal for CFTC to take control of crypto exchanges away from the SEC.

James O'Keefe, Founder and CEO of Project Veritas, published a shocking video showing that over a period of sixteen months, Biden's DOJ and the SDNY spied on journalists by filing a series of secret warrants, orders, and a subpoena to surreptitiously collect from Microsoft and other companies our privileged, and constitutionally protected, communications. Microsoft was bound by a secrecy order not to divulge what the SDNY was doing. The net effect is their conduct directly violated Judge Analisa Torres' order appointing a Special Master who is compelled to apply journalistic privileges to our journalists' materials.  The SDNY chose not to inform Judge Torres, or the Special Master, Judge Barbara Jones. Project Veritas filed a motion this week to require the SDNY to comply with the Special Master order by stopping their review of the surreptitiously obtained materials.  Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com

Big crypto news today - Elon Musk tweets he is building a case against the SEC. Huge Ripple XRP news as Judge Torres issues a denial to the SEC. Ripple's top lawyer slams SEC for ‘offensive' use of unsealed legal memos. The secret service launched a crypto awareness hub to remain at the forefront of both educating the public and combating financial fraud. Blockchain Backer interview - https://youtu.be/NO89sfz70QUChris Swenor interview - https://youtu.be/7ZH2Y4M59pwhttps://www.Algorand.comhttps://taxbit.com/invite/thinkingcrypto/?fpr=thinkingcrypto

Judge Torres gave a big update in the SEC Ripple XRP lawsuit today. Gary Gensler talks crypto regulations and enforcement actions. Ripple partners with Modulr. A bipartisan bill was reintroduced in the US Congress to eliminate taxes for small crypto transactions. Nasdaq listed company Mawson to build a new 100MW bitcoin mining facility in Pennsylvania. Stacks has raised $150M for a new entity to build the largest ecosystem of Bitcoin applications. HBAR Foundation has partnered with Ubisoft, Hedera's newest governing council member.Greg Dickerson interview - https://youtu.be/usc4UXmEkdUHong Fang interview - https://youtu.be/xD8Lsrr_Z3IMuneeb Ali interview - https://youtu.be/ArxUpGVE_1YSponsors.https://www.Algorand.comhttps://taxbit.com/invite/thinkingcrypto/?fpr=thinkingcrypto--

Big crypto news today as Bank of America Corp published its first research coverage focused on cryptocurrencies and other digital assets today. Massive SEC Ripple XRP lawsuit news as Judge Torres grants amici status to attorney John E Deaton and Movants. SEC chair Gary Gensler will testify tomorrow in the House Financial Services Committee (HFSC).Warsaw-based crypto startup Ramp hits $300 million valuation in Series A raise.Dan Tapiero Interview - https://youtu.be/ZyOk_8pT18kMarathon CEO Fred Thiel - https://youtu.be/mZMU7I-MGWE

In this episode, the instant Recap from NYY Recaps as the Yankees defeat the Tigers 6-4 behind a strong Jameson Taillon, who picked up his first win with the Yankees (and first win in exactly 2 years.) 

SEC v Ripple - ORDER by Judge Torres to John Deaton - Clayton and Hinman Conflict of Interest? RESERVE a SPOT - Virtual Meet-up #2 https://otc.one/meetup​ SUPPORT ON THE CHAIN BUY US A COFFEE https://otc.one/buy-us-a-coffee​ -------------- SUBSCRIBE TO THE OTC PODCAST: https://otc.one/podcast​ -------------- FOLLOW ON THE CHAIN: Subscribe to our other Youtube Channel: http://www.youtube.com/c/OnTheChain​​ On The Web: https:/onthechain.io​ Follow OTC on Twitter: https://twitter.com/on_the_chain​ Join our FREE Telegram Roundtable channel: https://t.me/onthechain_roundtable​ -------------- JEFF Follow Jeff on Twitter: https://twitter.com/thehodlreview​​ -------------- CHIP Follow Chip on Twitter: https://twitter.com/stephenchip​​ Follow Chip's Coil Blog: http://mindtoss.com​​ -------------- DISCLAIMER: All opinions expressed by content contributors that appear on OTC are solely expressing their opinions and do not reflect the opinions of OTC, its affiliates, or sponsors. Content contributors may have previously disseminated information on a social media platform, website, or another medium such as a podcast, television, or radio. OTC, Content Contributors, Affiliates, or Sponsors are not obligated to update or correct any information. The content contributors are sharing the information which they believe to be reliable. OTC, its affiliates, or sponsors cannot guarantee the accuracy of the opinion shared, and viewers, readers, and listeners should not rely on it. Opinions expressed are not financial advice. Please consult a licensed financial advisor before making any financial decisions. It is imperative that before you invest in anything you research before investing. Do not invest based on what someone else is doing or not doing, or based on other people's opinions.