The US SEC will flip the switch for Crypto this Friday, August 14. 🇺🇸 ✅️
I will share a live link so we can watch together this Friday morning. 10 AM ET/ 7 AM PT. 📺 👀
MARK YOUR CALENDAR LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.. 🗓
LOCK IN 🔐
I will share a live link so we can watch together this Friday morning. 10 AM ET/ 7 AM PT. 📺 👀
MARK YOUR CALENDAR LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.. 🗓
LOCK IN 🔐
🎉13😁3👎1
Wacky Marxist Francesca Hong LOSES Wisconsin Dem Gubernatorial Primary to Establishment Opponent in Shocking Upset Following Suspicious Late-Night Ballot Drop
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2026/08/wacky-marxist-francesca-hong-loses-wisconsin-dem-gubernatorial/
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2026/08/wacky-marxist-francesca-hong-loses-wisconsin-dem-gubernatorial/
The Gateway Pundit
Wacky Marxist Francesca Hong LOSES Wisconsin Dem Gubernatorial Primary to Establishment Opponent in Shocking Upset Following Suspicious…
The dim-witted, holiday-hating communist who had emerged as one of new 'stars' of the Democratic Party has lost her primary in a stunning upset to a largely…
👏27🤣15😁6
Uranium One and Iran sections of the image contain claims that are often overstated.
THE URANIUM IS THE SIGNAL — FOLLOW THE MATERIAL
1/8 — START WITH THE MATERIAL
Uranium is not simply a commodity. Its isotopic composition, enrichment history and physical characteristics can provide investigators with a scientific record.
The IAEA uses environmental sampling and mass spectrometry to identify uranium particles and determine their isotopic composition. These techniques can reveal evidence of enrichment and help identify undeclared nuclear activities.
The material can leave a trail.
2/8 — URANIUM ONE
In 2010, Russia’s state nuclear company Rosatom acquired a controlling interest in Uranium One, a Canadian company with uranium mining interests in the United States.
But an important fact gets lost in the political debate:
The transaction went through CFIUS, the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, which had nine voting members from across the U.S. government. Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State and a CFIUS member, but the Secretary of State did not personally approve the transaction.
Federal rules gave the President the final authority to block a covered transaction.
So the documented story is more complicated than “Clinton gave Russia America’s uranium.”
3/8 — THE REAL QUESTION
That does not mean every question surrounding the transaction disappears.
The legitimate questions are:
Who owned what?
Who benefited financially?
Who lobbied whom?
What information did government officials have?
What did investigators uncover?
And were any private financial relationships relevant to government decision-making?
Those are questions for evidence—not assumptions.
4/8 — IRAN AND THE OBAMA DEAL
In 2015, the Obama administration and its international partners reached the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), designed to restrict Iran’s nuclear program.
The agreement imposed limits on uranium enrichment and stockpiles and established extensive international monitoring.
Sanctions relief was tied to Iran implementing its nuclear commitments and verification.
Treasury described the framework as sanctions relief in exchange for verified nuclear steps—not simply unrestricted financial access.
5/8 — FOLLOW THE MONEY
Sanctions relief is a separate question from nuclear material.
During the Iran negotiations, U.S. officials discussed substantial Iranian assets that had been immobilized by sanctions.
The numbers frequently repeated in political arguments can refer to different things: frozen foreign-exchange holdings, permitted transactions, oil revenues, or actual sanctions relief.
That distinction matters.
“Billions were involved” is not the same claim as “billions were secretly transferred to fund Iran’s nuclear program.”
The evidence has to establish the connection.
6/8 — FOLLOW THE URANIUM
This is where the investigation becomes scientific.
Uranium has isotopes including U-234, U-235 and U-238.
Enrichment changes the relative abundance of these isotopes.
IAEA laboratories can analyze microscopic particles collected during inspections and identify isotopic signatures.
That means investigators don't necessarily have to rely only on paperwork.
The material itself can provide evidence
7/8 — THE CHAIN OF EVIDENCE
A serious investigation should therefore follow a sequence:
PRESSURE → ACCESS → RECOVERY → VERIFICATION → EVIDENCE
Who created the pressure?
Who provided access?
Where did the material go?
Who handled or transported it?
What was recovered?
Was the chain of custody preserved?
Can independent laboratories verify the results?
Only then should conclusions be drawn
8/8 — THE BIGGER QUESTION
The most important question isn't simply:
“Who signed the deal?”
It is:
WHERE DID THE MATERIAL GO, WHO CONTROLLED IT, WHO FINANCED THE TRANSACTIONS, AND WHAT DOES THE PHYSICAL EVIDENCE SHOW?
Documents can be disputed
Political narratives can change
Financial relationships can be complicated
But nuclear material can carry a forensic history
Follow the uranium
Trace the transactions
Verify the evidence
Then draw the conclusion
THE URANIUM IS THE SIGNAL — FOLLOW THE MATERIAL
1/8 — START WITH THE MATERIAL
Uranium is not simply a commodity. Its isotopic composition, enrichment history and physical characteristics can provide investigators with a scientific record.
The IAEA uses environmental sampling and mass spectrometry to identify uranium particles and determine their isotopic composition. These techniques can reveal evidence of enrichment and help identify undeclared nuclear activities.
The material can leave a trail.
2/8 — URANIUM ONE
In 2010, Russia’s state nuclear company Rosatom acquired a controlling interest in Uranium One, a Canadian company with uranium mining interests in the United States.
But an important fact gets lost in the political debate:
The transaction went through CFIUS, the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, which had nine voting members from across the U.S. government. Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State and a CFIUS member, but the Secretary of State did not personally approve the transaction.
Federal rules gave the President the final authority to block a covered transaction.
So the documented story is more complicated than “Clinton gave Russia America’s uranium.”
3/8 — THE REAL QUESTION
That does not mean every question surrounding the transaction disappears.
The legitimate questions are:
Who owned what?
Who benefited financially?
Who lobbied whom?
What information did government officials have?
What did investigators uncover?
And were any private financial relationships relevant to government decision-making?
Those are questions for evidence—not assumptions.
4/8 — IRAN AND THE OBAMA DEAL
In 2015, the Obama administration and its international partners reached the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), designed to restrict Iran’s nuclear program.
The agreement imposed limits on uranium enrichment and stockpiles and established extensive international monitoring.
Sanctions relief was tied to Iran implementing its nuclear commitments and verification.
Treasury described the framework as sanctions relief in exchange for verified nuclear steps—not simply unrestricted financial access.
5/8 — FOLLOW THE MONEY
Sanctions relief is a separate question from nuclear material.
During the Iran negotiations, U.S. officials discussed substantial Iranian assets that had been immobilized by sanctions.
The numbers frequently repeated in political arguments can refer to different things: frozen foreign-exchange holdings, permitted transactions, oil revenues, or actual sanctions relief.
That distinction matters.
“Billions were involved” is not the same claim as “billions were secretly transferred to fund Iran’s nuclear program.”
The evidence has to establish the connection.
6/8 — FOLLOW THE URANIUM
This is where the investigation becomes scientific.
Uranium has isotopes including U-234, U-235 and U-238.
Enrichment changes the relative abundance of these isotopes.
IAEA laboratories can analyze microscopic particles collected during inspections and identify isotopic signatures.
That means investigators don't necessarily have to rely only on paperwork.
The material itself can provide evidence
7/8 — THE CHAIN OF EVIDENCE
A serious investigation should therefore follow a sequence:
PRESSURE → ACCESS → RECOVERY → VERIFICATION → EVIDENCE
Who created the pressure?
Who provided access?
Where did the material go?
Who handled or transported it?
What was recovered?
Was the chain of custody preserved?
Can independent laboratories verify the results?
Only then should conclusions be drawn
8/8 — THE BIGGER QUESTION
The most important question isn't simply:
“Who signed the deal?”
It is:
WHERE DID THE MATERIAL GO, WHO CONTROLLED IT, WHO FINANCED THE TRANSACTIONS, AND WHAT DOES THE PHYSICAL EVIDENCE SHOW?
Documents can be disputed
Political narratives can change
Financial relationships can be complicated
But nuclear material can carry a forensic history
Follow the uranium
Trace the transactions
Verify the evidence
Then draw the conclusion
👍13❤6👏2💯2
Reports say Site 99 contains yellowcake and other nuclear-related material, but the material has not yet been removed, and the reporting does not establish that it is “highly enriched uranium” or that the site is already under U.S. control. The U.S.-brokered arrangement is intended to have the IAEA oversee removal.
SITE 99 — THE URANIUM IS THE SIGNAL
1/9 — SOMETHING WAS LEFT BEHIND
A clandestine Syrian facility known as “Site 99” has suddenly become the center of an international nuclear-security operation.
According to U.S. and Israeli officials cited by Axios, the Assad regime stored nuclear-related material there connected to Syria’s former Al-Kibar nuclear program.
The reported material includes yellowcake uranium and other residue/leftovers.
This is not a nuclear weapon—but it is material that requires serious security controls.
2/9 — THE HISTORY MATTERS
In 2007, Israel destroyed a facility at Syria’s Dair Alzour/Al-Kibar site.
The IAEA subsequently investigated the facility and concluded that it was very likely a nuclear reactor that should have been declared to the Agency.
IAEA environmental sampling also detected uranium particles that were not part of Syria’s declared nuclear inventory.
3/9 — THEN CAME SITE 99
The newly reported Site 99 appears to be part of the unresolved nuclear legacy left from that program.
U.S. officials told Axios that the material stored there includes yellowcake—a uranium concentrate produced during uranium processing.
Crucially:
Yellowcake ≠ highly enriched uranium.
The image's claim that a cache of “highly enriched uranium” was discovered is therefore stronger than what has been publicly reported.
4/9 — WHY IS THIS A PROBLEM?
Yellowcake is not a nuclear bomb.
But uranium-bearing material can be further processed as part of the nuclear fuel cycle, and radioactive material can pose security risks if obtained by unauthorized actors.
U.S. officials reportedly assessed that the Site 99 material could not directly be used to make a nuclear weapon, although radioactive material could present a potential “dirty bomb” concern.
5/9 — THE SITE BECAME A SECURITY ISSUE
After Assad's government fell, Israeli intelligence reportedly detected activity around Site 99.
Israeli forces had previously struck entrances to the site, according to officials cited in the reporting.
Israel reportedly warned that it would not accept nuclear material remaining unsecured there and had considered further military action if access to the material became a concern.
6/9 — TRUMP'S ROLE
The Trump administration reportedly chose a diplomatic solution rather than another military strike.
Washington worked with Israel and Syria to obtain Syrian cooperation for removal of the material.
The reported arrangement calls for the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to oversee the process.
7/9 — BUT HERE IS THE CRITICAL DETAIL
As of August 12, 2026, the material has not yet been removed.
So the accurate sequence is:
DISCOVERY → SECURITY CONCERNS → DIPLOMATIC PRESSURE → AGREEMENT → IAEA REMOVAL
Not:
“America already seized the uranium.”
Not:
“The uranium has already been removed.”
Those claims go beyond the available reporting.
8/9 — WHY THE IAEA MATTERS
The IAEA exists precisely to verify nuclear material and nuclear activities through safeguards, inspections, records, sampling and technical analysis.
Syria has an IAEA safeguards agreement in force, and the Agency has a long-standing unresolved file concerning the Al-Kibar/Dair Alzour program.
The objective now should be straightforward:
SECURE IT.
DOCUMENT IT.
REMOVE IT.
VERIFY IT.
PRESERVE THE RECORD.
9/9 — FOLLOW THE MATERIAL
Site 99 raises a much bigger question than one secret facility.
Where did the material originate?
How did it get there?
Who knew about it?
Who controlled the facility?
What exactly is stored there?
What will the IAEA find when it conducts its examination?
And what does the physical evidence tell us about Syria's former nuclear program?
The deal is the mechanism.
The material is the evidence.
Verification is the test.
SITE 99 — THE URANIUM IS THE SIGNAL
1/9 — SOMETHING WAS LEFT BEHIND
A clandestine Syrian facility known as “Site 99” has suddenly become the center of an international nuclear-security operation.
According to U.S. and Israeli officials cited by Axios, the Assad regime stored nuclear-related material there connected to Syria’s former Al-Kibar nuclear program.
The reported material includes yellowcake uranium and other residue/leftovers.
This is not a nuclear weapon—but it is material that requires serious security controls.
2/9 — THE HISTORY MATTERS
In 2007, Israel destroyed a facility at Syria’s Dair Alzour/Al-Kibar site.
The IAEA subsequently investigated the facility and concluded that it was very likely a nuclear reactor that should have been declared to the Agency.
IAEA environmental sampling also detected uranium particles that were not part of Syria’s declared nuclear inventory.
3/9 — THEN CAME SITE 99
The newly reported Site 99 appears to be part of the unresolved nuclear legacy left from that program.
U.S. officials told Axios that the material stored there includes yellowcake—a uranium concentrate produced during uranium processing.
Crucially:
Yellowcake ≠ highly enriched uranium.
The image's claim that a cache of “highly enriched uranium” was discovered is therefore stronger than what has been publicly reported.
4/9 — WHY IS THIS A PROBLEM?
Yellowcake is not a nuclear bomb.
But uranium-bearing material can be further processed as part of the nuclear fuel cycle, and radioactive material can pose security risks if obtained by unauthorized actors.
U.S. officials reportedly assessed that the Site 99 material could not directly be used to make a nuclear weapon, although radioactive material could present a potential “dirty bomb” concern.
5/9 — THE SITE BECAME A SECURITY ISSUE
After Assad's government fell, Israeli intelligence reportedly detected activity around Site 99.
Israeli forces had previously struck entrances to the site, according to officials cited in the reporting.
Israel reportedly warned that it would not accept nuclear material remaining unsecured there and had considered further military action if access to the material became a concern.
6/9 — TRUMP'S ROLE
The Trump administration reportedly chose a diplomatic solution rather than another military strike.
Washington worked with Israel and Syria to obtain Syrian cooperation for removal of the material.
The reported arrangement calls for the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to oversee the process.
7/9 — BUT HERE IS THE CRITICAL DETAIL
As of August 12, 2026, the material has not yet been removed.
So the accurate sequence is:
DISCOVERY → SECURITY CONCERNS → DIPLOMATIC PRESSURE → AGREEMENT → IAEA REMOVAL
Not:
“America already seized the uranium.”
Not:
“The uranium has already been removed.”
Those claims go beyond the available reporting.
8/9 — WHY THE IAEA MATTERS
The IAEA exists precisely to verify nuclear material and nuclear activities through safeguards, inspections, records, sampling and technical analysis.
Syria has an IAEA safeguards agreement in force, and the Agency has a long-standing unresolved file concerning the Al-Kibar/Dair Alzour program.
The objective now should be straightforward:
SECURE IT.
DOCUMENT IT.
REMOVE IT.
VERIFY IT.
PRESERVE THE RECORD.
9/9 — FOLLOW THE MATERIAL
Site 99 raises a much bigger question than one secret facility.
Where did the material originate?
How did it get there?
Who knew about it?
Who controlled the facility?
What exactly is stored there?
What will the IAEA find when it conducts its examination?
And what does the physical evidence tell us about Syria's former nuclear program?
The deal is the mechanism.
The material is the evidence.
Verification is the test.
❤19👏4👍2💯1
XRPL and the Bank of England: Building the Infrastructure for Digital Money, Tokenization, and Identity
The Convergence of Financial Infrastructure, Tokenization, and Identity
The synchronization of central bank digital currency (CBDC) exploration, enterprise blockchain integration, and decentralized identity (DID) standards marks a critical evolution in global financial architecture. Rather than operating in isolation, these three pillars—money, institutional assets, and verifiable identity—are converging to form a unified, programmable ecosystem.
1. The Sovereign Layer: CBDCs and Stablecoin Interoperability
Central banks are moving beyond theoretical research into practical implementation frameworks.
Multi-Currency Frameworks: Projects like the Bank of England's digital pound initiatives explore how retail CBDCs, wholesale CBDCs, and regulated private stablecoins can interact seamlessly.
Preventing Fragmentation: The primary challenge for central banks is avoiding liquidity silos. Interoperability protocols ensure that value can move fluidly between traditional real-time gross settlement (RTGS) systems and distributed ledger technology (DLT) networks without introducing counterparty or systemic risk.
2. The Institutional Rail: Wholesale Tokenization
Traditional financial markets—specifically fixed income, repo markets, and government securities (such as UK gilts)—are undergoing structural modernization.
Efficiency Gains: Wholesale tokenization addresses the inefficiencies of legacy settlement cycles, which often tie up capital for days.
Public-Permissionless Integration: Networks like the XRP Ledger (XRPL) are increasingly evaluated by public sector taskforces and financial institutions because they offer high throughput, low settlement latency, and native tokenization standards. By moving traditional assets onto programmable rails, institutions can enable atomic settlement, automated compliance, and 24/7 liquidity management.
3. The Identity & Compliance Stack: Verifiable Credentials and Data Anchoring
As financial transactions move to decentralized and tokenized rails, regulatory compliance (Anti-Money Laundering and Know Your Customer) cannot be an afterthought. It must be embedded into the protocol layer.
Decentralized Identifiers (DIDs): Native identity standards (such as the XRPL’s credential frameworks) allow users and institutions to prove attributes about themselves without exposing underlying sensitive data.
Advanced Verification Models: Emerging protocols—such as those handling biometric or zero-knowledge-proof data anchoring—allow identity verification to happen cryptographically. This ensures that only authenticated actors can interact with tokenized assets or sovereign currency rails, satisfying regulatory mandates while preserving user privacy.
The Big Picture
The parallel advancement of central bank digital money, enterprise-grade tokenization rails, and cryptographic identity protocols points to a single overarching trend: the silent architecture of the next financial era is being built.
By fusing compliant money, tokenized real-world assets, and verifiable identity onto scalable ledgers, the global financial system is transitioning from fragmented legacy databases toward a unified, high-speed, and secure digital foundation.
The Convergence of Financial Infrastructure, Tokenization, and Identity
The synchronization of central bank digital currency (CBDC) exploration, enterprise blockchain integration, and decentralized identity (DID) standards marks a critical evolution in global financial architecture. Rather than operating in isolation, these three pillars—money, institutional assets, and verifiable identity—are converging to form a unified, programmable ecosystem.
1. The Sovereign Layer: CBDCs and Stablecoin Interoperability
Central banks are moving beyond theoretical research into practical implementation frameworks.
Multi-Currency Frameworks: Projects like the Bank of England's digital pound initiatives explore how retail CBDCs, wholesale CBDCs, and regulated private stablecoins can interact seamlessly.
Preventing Fragmentation: The primary challenge for central banks is avoiding liquidity silos. Interoperability protocols ensure that value can move fluidly between traditional real-time gross settlement (RTGS) systems and distributed ledger technology (DLT) networks without introducing counterparty or systemic risk.
2. The Institutional Rail: Wholesale Tokenization
Traditional financial markets—specifically fixed income, repo markets, and government securities (such as UK gilts)—are undergoing structural modernization.
Efficiency Gains: Wholesale tokenization addresses the inefficiencies of legacy settlement cycles, which often tie up capital for days.
Public-Permissionless Integration: Networks like the XRP Ledger (XRPL) are increasingly evaluated by public sector taskforces and financial institutions because they offer high throughput, low settlement latency, and native tokenization standards. By moving traditional assets onto programmable rails, institutions can enable atomic settlement, automated compliance, and 24/7 liquidity management.
3. The Identity & Compliance Stack: Verifiable Credentials and Data Anchoring
As financial transactions move to decentralized and tokenized rails, regulatory compliance (Anti-Money Laundering and Know Your Customer) cannot be an afterthought. It must be embedded into the protocol layer.
Decentralized Identifiers (DIDs): Native identity standards (such as the XRPL’s credential frameworks) allow users and institutions to prove attributes about themselves without exposing underlying sensitive data.
Advanced Verification Models: Emerging protocols—such as those handling biometric or zero-knowledge-proof data anchoring—allow identity verification to happen cryptographically. This ensures that only authenticated actors can interact with tokenized assets or sovereign currency rails, satisfying regulatory mandates while preserving user privacy.
The Big Picture
The parallel advancement of central bank digital money, enterprise-grade tokenization rails, and cryptographic identity protocols points to a single overarching trend: the silent architecture of the next financial era is being built.
By fusing compliant money, tokenized real-world assets, and verifiable identity onto scalable ledgers, the global financial system is transitioning from fragmented legacy databases toward a unified, high-speed, and secure digital foundation.
👎5❤4👍3👏1
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
WOW! This Wisconsin voter just went BERSERK on the communists trying to get elected
"All I know is who I don't support. VIET CONG. F*cking communist piece of sht! No, I don't support the Democrat socialists of America! F*ck them! If you think communism is so good, move to Havana, Pyongyang, Caracas — I'll pay for your f*cking air fare, but you gotta renounce your American citizenship. I'll pay for that too!"
"All I know is who I don't support. VIET CONG. F*cking communist piece of sht! No, I don't support the Democrat socialists of America! F*ck them! If you think communism is so good, move to Havana, Pyongyang, Caracas — I'll pay for your f*cking air fare, but you gotta renounce your American citizenship. I'll pay for that too!"
👏73❤🔥11😁7👍3❤2🔥2
JUST IN - The House Judiciary Committee sent a letter to software company IDEMIA requesting information regarding New Jersey registering thousands of noncitizens to vote.
Using IDEMIA's software, noncitizens noted they weren't citizens but did want to vote.
New Jersey's state agencies had this information, and proceeded to register roughly 6000 noncitizens to vote anyway. Hundreds DID vote.
We need to know more.
🔗 Read more: https://judiciary.house.gov/media/press-releases/house-republicans-seek-information-new-jersey-vendor-alleged-software-error
Using IDEMIA's software, noncitizens noted they weren't citizens but did want to vote.
New Jersey's state agencies had this information, and proceeded to register roughly 6000 noncitizens to vote anyway. Hundreds DID vote.
We need to know more.
🔗 Read more: https://judiciary.house.gov/media/press-releases/house-republicans-seek-information-new-jersey-vendor-alleged-software-error
🤬27💯4
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Leftist travels through time to save George Floyd
🤣31💯5
🚨HUGE: Medicaid Kingpin’s got CAUGHT billing $32 MILLION from fraudulent daycares, while donating TENS OF THOUSANDS to Kathy Hochul and other Democrats.
Local powerbrokers Baoli Zhang and Jiemin Shang both own several fraudulent daycares racking in MILLIONS of dollars from Medicaid.
@nickshirley exposed these same men and Democrats went silent.
Coincidence? I think not.
Local powerbrokers Baoli Zhang and Jiemin Shang both own several fraudulent daycares racking in MILLIONS of dollars from Medicaid.
@nickshirley exposed these same men and Democrats went silent.
Coincidence? I think not.
❤28🔥24🤬4🤣3
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Liberal Witches gloat with joy over dead babies ☠️
🤬55🤮13💯7😱3
The SEC will hold an open meeting tomorrow (Friday, August 14, 2026) at 10:00 a.m. ET to vote on whether to issue a proposed rule creating a tailored offering regime for certain investment contracts involving crypto assets (commonly called “Regulation Crypto” or “Regulation Crypto Assets”).
Core Purpose
This is the SEC’s first formal rulemaking for crypto capital raises. It aims to replace regulation-by-enforcement with clear, codified paths for projects to raise money when their token sales involve investment contracts under the Howey test.
Expected Framework (based on Chair Paul Atkins’ March 2026 description)
Three main pathways:
Startup Exemption — Up to ~$5 million total over a maximum of 4 years. Light, principles-based (whitepaper-style) disclosures. Notice to the SEC required.
Fundraising Exemption — Up to ~$75 million in any 12-month period. Higher disclosure requirements, including financial statements and semi-annual reporting (structure similar to Reg A+).
Investment Contract Safe Harbor — A clear off-ramp. Once the issuer permanently ceases all essential managerial efforts it promised, the token can exit securities status and trade as a non-security (typically a commodity).
Key Context
Follows the March 2026 joint SEC-CFTC token taxonomy that classified most crypto assets as non-securities.
Proceeding while congressional market-structure legislation (CLARITY Act) remains stalled.
The Commission currently consists of Chair Paul Atkins, Commissioner Hester Peirce, and Commissioner Mark Uyeda.
This is only a vote to propose the rules for public comment. Final adoption would come later after the notice-and-comment process.
Bottom line: Tomorrow’s meeting is the formal start of the SEC writing specific rules for crypto fundraising instead of relying on case-by-case enforcement. The actual text of the ~400-page proposal will determine the real details and conditions.
https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/meetings-events/open-meeting-081426
Core Purpose
This is the SEC’s first formal rulemaking for crypto capital raises. It aims to replace regulation-by-enforcement with clear, codified paths for projects to raise money when their token sales involve investment contracts under the Howey test.
Expected Framework (based on Chair Paul Atkins’ March 2026 description)
Three main pathways:
Startup Exemption — Up to ~$5 million total over a maximum of 4 years. Light, principles-based (whitepaper-style) disclosures. Notice to the SEC required.
Fundraising Exemption — Up to ~$75 million in any 12-month period. Higher disclosure requirements, including financial statements and semi-annual reporting (structure similar to Reg A+).
Investment Contract Safe Harbor — A clear off-ramp. Once the issuer permanently ceases all essential managerial efforts it promised, the token can exit securities status and trade as a non-security (typically a commodity).
Key Context
Follows the March 2026 joint SEC-CFTC token taxonomy that classified most crypto assets as non-securities.
Proceeding while congressional market-structure legislation (CLARITY Act) remains stalled.
The Commission currently consists of Chair Paul Atkins, Commissioner Hester Peirce, and Commissioner Mark Uyeda.
This is only a vote to propose the rules for public comment. Final adoption would come later after the notice-and-comment process.
Bottom line: Tomorrow’s meeting is the formal start of the SEC writing specific rules for crypto fundraising instead of relying on case-by-case enforcement. The actual text of the ~400-page proposal will determine the real details and conditions.
https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/meetings-events/open-meeting-081426
👍4❤1
🟢 CFTC Chairman Michael S. Selig has released the agenda for the inaugural meeting of the agency’s Innovation Advisory Committee (IAC) on Thursday, August 20, 2026, at 1:00 p.m. EST in Washington, D.C. 🟢
The lead session is exactly as stated: “Crypto’s Regulatory Evolution: From Uncertainty to Clarity.”
Official Details
Sponsor: Chairman Michael S. Selig (sworn in December 22, 2025; nominated by President Trump).
Location: Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street NW, Washington, DC.
Livestream: Available on CFTC.gov. Dial-in options and webinar credentials (ID: 165 371 7748; Passcode: 172798) are published on the agency site.
Public comments: Accepted through August 27 via Regulations.gov.
Agenda Structure
1:00–1:30 p.m. — Introductions and opening remarks (Designated Federal Officer Michael Passalacqua, IAC Chair Walt Lukken of the FIA, and Chairman Selig).
1:30–2:20 p.m. — Session I: “Crypto’s Regulatory Evolution: From Uncertainty to Clarity”
This is the core crypto discussion. It covers:
Early regulatory approaches and the emergence of crypto asset markets.
The patchwork of state licensing regimes.
The long absence of a comprehensive federal market structure framework.
Practical industry experience with overlapping jurisdictions, inconsistent interpretations, and regulation-by-enforcement.
Effects of that uncertainty on innovation, capital formation, and the physical location of crypto businesses.
Recent agency steps toward greater transparency and clarity under existing statutory authority.
How agency action can complement pending congressional legislation.
Remaining obstacles to a durable federal framework, plus cybersecurity, operational resilience, and infrastructure requirements for trusted markets.
2:20–2:30 p.m. — Break.
2:30–3:05 p.m. — Session II: Artificial Intelligence — Preparing for Intelligent Markets
Focus on AI applications in trading, compliance, surveillance, risk management, and the rise of agentic systems that can execute transactions autonomously. Includes the intersection of crypto and AI.
3:05–3:55 p.m. — Session III: Prediction Markets — Innovation, Jurisdiction, and the Future of Event Contracts
Covers the growth of event contracts, federal vs. state jurisdictional fights (including recent litigation), product design principles, surveillance, manipulation risks, and customer protections.
4:00 p.m. — Closing remarks by Chairman Selig.
Committee Composition and Context
The IAC is a high-level industry panel established earlier in 2026. Its roster includes major crypto and traditional-market executives, among them:
Brad Garlinghouse (CEO, Ripple) ✅️
Brian Armstrong (CEO, Coinbase)
Terry Duffy (Chair & CEO, CME Group)
Adena Friedman (Chair & CEO, Nasdaq)
Jeff Sprecher (CEO, Intercontinental Exchange)
Tyler Winklevoss (CEO, Gemini)
Anatoly Yakovenko (CEO, Solana Labs)
Sergey Nazarov (CEO, Chainlink Labs)
Shayne Coplan (CEO, Polymarket)
Tarek Mansour (CEO, Kalshi)
and executives from Uniswap, Kraken, a16z crypto, DTCC, and others.
This is not a low-level staff roundtable. It places the CEOs of the largest U.S. crypto firms and the dominant derivatives exchanges in the same room with the CFTC Chairman to discuss market structure in real time.
Broader Regulatory Backdrop
Selig has consistently framed the CFTC’s role as ending the prior era of regulation-by-enforcement and providing workable clarity while Congress continues work on market-structure legislation (the CLARITY Act remains the primary vehicle). The agency has already coordinated with the SEC on joint interpretive guidance classifying certain major assets as digital commodities and has pursued initiatives on listed spot crypto trading and tokenized collateral. The August 20 session is structured as a direct examination of the remaining gaps between current agency tools and a durable federal framework.
The meeting is public via livestream. Industry and market participants can submit written comments through August 27.
The lead session is exactly as stated: “Crypto’s Regulatory Evolution: From Uncertainty to Clarity.”
Official Details
Sponsor: Chairman Michael S. Selig (sworn in December 22, 2025; nominated by President Trump).
Location: Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street NW, Washington, DC.
Livestream: Available on CFTC.gov. Dial-in options and webinar credentials (ID: 165 371 7748; Passcode: 172798) are published on the agency site.
Public comments: Accepted through August 27 via Regulations.gov.
Agenda Structure
1:00–1:30 p.m. — Introductions and opening remarks (Designated Federal Officer Michael Passalacqua, IAC Chair Walt Lukken of the FIA, and Chairman Selig).
1:30–2:20 p.m. — Session I: “Crypto’s Regulatory Evolution: From Uncertainty to Clarity”
This is the core crypto discussion. It covers:
Early regulatory approaches and the emergence of crypto asset markets.
The patchwork of state licensing regimes.
The long absence of a comprehensive federal market structure framework.
Practical industry experience with overlapping jurisdictions, inconsistent interpretations, and regulation-by-enforcement.
Effects of that uncertainty on innovation, capital formation, and the physical location of crypto businesses.
Recent agency steps toward greater transparency and clarity under existing statutory authority.
How agency action can complement pending congressional legislation.
Remaining obstacles to a durable federal framework, plus cybersecurity, operational resilience, and infrastructure requirements for trusted markets.
2:20–2:30 p.m. — Break.
2:30–3:05 p.m. — Session II: Artificial Intelligence — Preparing for Intelligent Markets
Focus on AI applications in trading, compliance, surveillance, risk management, and the rise of agentic systems that can execute transactions autonomously. Includes the intersection of crypto and AI.
3:05–3:55 p.m. — Session III: Prediction Markets — Innovation, Jurisdiction, and the Future of Event Contracts
Covers the growth of event contracts, federal vs. state jurisdictional fights (including recent litigation), product design principles, surveillance, manipulation risks, and customer protections.
4:00 p.m. — Closing remarks by Chairman Selig.
Committee Composition and Context
The IAC is a high-level industry panel established earlier in 2026. Its roster includes major crypto and traditional-market executives, among them:
Brad Garlinghouse (CEO, Ripple) ✅️
Brian Armstrong (CEO, Coinbase)
Terry Duffy (Chair & CEO, CME Group)
Adena Friedman (Chair & CEO, Nasdaq)
Jeff Sprecher (CEO, Intercontinental Exchange)
Tyler Winklevoss (CEO, Gemini)
Anatoly Yakovenko (CEO, Solana Labs)
Sergey Nazarov (CEO, Chainlink Labs)
Shayne Coplan (CEO, Polymarket)
Tarek Mansour (CEO, Kalshi)
and executives from Uniswap, Kraken, a16z crypto, DTCC, and others.
This is not a low-level staff roundtable. It places the CEOs of the largest U.S. crypto firms and the dominant derivatives exchanges in the same room with the CFTC Chairman to discuss market structure in real time.
Broader Regulatory Backdrop
Selig has consistently framed the CFTC’s role as ending the prior era of regulation-by-enforcement and providing workable clarity while Congress continues work on market-structure legislation (the CLARITY Act remains the primary vehicle). The agency has already coordinated with the SEC on joint interpretive guidance classifying certain major assets as digital commodities and has pursued initiatives on listed spot crypto trading and tokenized collateral. The August 20 session is structured as a direct examination of the remaining gaps between current agency tools and a durable federal framework.
The meeting is public via livestream. Industry and market participants can submit written comments through August 27.
👍5👏2🎉1💯1