american people for and no one is held to account. ah ah, the the this is been bus, so if you can't afford to miss, i'm rachel blevins and i'm bridge aboard watching thing coming up are asking the court to oppose punitive damages on these social media giants. we're going to hold this big tech very accountable. former us president donald trump has filed the lawsuit against big pack,

claiming censorship straight ahead. we bring you the details of the suit and what consequences if any, it could have. then we turn to the oil sector. we're opec member. the united arab emirates is looking to ramp up production later on. we take a look under the hood of the world's oil cartel and what we could see unfold in the coming months and the top us lawmakers call for a crackdown on crypto referring to the lack of regulation does unsustainable. we'll take a look at how the latest comments are impacting the world's most popular currency. we have a lot to get to. so let's get started. the former president, trump has joined a class action lawsuit against a number of big tech companies claiming they have violated the 1st amendment rights of their users. boom, best co host, an investigative journalist bend on has the story. originally trauma, as making the case that google and facebook and twitter have all violated his rights as a private citizen, as well as the rights of others. because they are not actually private companies,

but instead are acting as quote state actors. here's part of what from senator on wednesday, we're demanding and do the shadow banning a stop to the silencing and a stop to the blacklisting vanishing and cancelling that you know. so the problem, of course, is that so far and neither the courts nor congress seems to be willing to make a formal distinction on whether tech companies are platforms or publishers. the lawsuits are calling for courts to strike down section 230 a decades old internet law that protects tech companies from lawsuits over content moderation decisions the suits seek unspecified punitive damages. in addition, we are asking the court to impose punitive damages on these social media giants. we're going to hold big tech very accountable. but the fact is, while there is a lot of appetite out there for the social media companies to stop banding and

blacklisting certain users, the fact is making the legal argument that these companies cannot do. so because of the 1st amendment is difficult. obviously, the 1st amendment only applies to the government and not to private companies, which is why this lawsuit, among others, is making the case that these private companies are actually asking on behalf of the government. again, it's something that you could probably argue, but it's going to be a very difficult thing to prove. in a court of law, for boom bust, i'm been swan joining us now to go further in depth on this social media and political commentator. lauren chen. lauren is great, have you back on the show today? now trump says this is a way of holding big tech accountable. but what is he looking for with this lawsuit and doesn't go beyond just restoring his accounts? well, i think it's important to note that trump had actually for years to hold big tech companies accountable back when he was president. so for him to come out with this seemingly bold action now that he's out of office is

a strange choice. and i mean like many others, i do think that this is probably more of a publicity stunt than anything else and an attempt to get his social media accounts back. whether this will be successful or not. i unfortunately, don't think it will be not that there aren't some merit to their argument, but i doubt that the court will be ruling in their failure paper. and now lauren, i know that you're very critical of the way to social media is handled by many of these big companies. and trump is arguing that to bends point. the removal from social media was a violation of his 1st amendment, right. but at the end of the day, these are private companies. so is this really a free speech issue? i mean, how do you see it in that capacity? oh, the, it's a private company argument. i know it well. so there are couple of different things here. yes, facebook and twitter, these are private companies, but if you all recall at court has rule that trump was not able to block people because you know, twitter, it constitutes the public square and an area for public discussion. so it's very

strange to me how a court can time will tenuously rule that trump cannot block people because you know, public square public discussion. while also saying that facebook and twitter have no legal necessity of protecting the 1st amendment rights. and secondly, when it comes to private companies and the 1st amendment, we have seen in different court cases, that 1st amendment protection such as freedom of religion, do actually extend to companies. companies cannot discriminate against employees specifically based on freedom of religion. so if it comes to something like free speech, which is again, that same 1st amendment, i think there is, there is somewhat of a ground to argue that regardless of facebook is a platform that is privately owned. it should have at least some guarantee of protecting the rights of, of americans, at least when it, the free speech. and there is also be the other issue that when it comes to, for example, political campaigns, campaign that are run on the social media platforms. those are subject to campaign

finance laws. so you know, here we have in many ways the lines between private company and public square. they're kind of blurred and i guess i understand your point there. and i think that was very well said, but i guess when you talk about specifically about president trump or even a political campaign, those have become government and specific or public official or public accounts, but also specifically government entities, the leader of the united states. there is that a little different than some of these other cases when you're just saying, a conservative commentator may have been banned for whatever they said. well perhaps, but at the very least it would give credence to the fact that president trump should not have been bad, especially if he decides to run again. you do have people like laura lunar who are running for congress. her account was not in stated, i would even be happy if they ruled the government officials could not be banned. i mean, the, even, i think, went so far as to and was it somali a ban or remove a tweet from the actual president? like i said, i don't think that this last it will be successful. and we've seen even recently

that a case that was filed by the s t c was just thrown out facebook. these big companies have the best lawyers money can buy. and i think it's just pragmatically, even if they were successful, because compet seeking damages, these companies are not short on cash. we've seen them happily pay, you know, fees of a $1000000000.00 as if it were nothing. but i'm happy that at least this conversation is being brought to the forefront because this is an issue that's going on for years and it has not received the attention it deserved. now learn while we have you here, i want to get to another argument that i know you're very familiar with, which is the fact that top social media giants are often criticized for acting as publishers while enjoying the protections of a platform. now even though there was a push during the trump administration to take away their legal immunity, if they act as publishers, does that same push still exist in government today? or is this just kind of trump carrying that torch? right, well for your audience members who are not familiar with section 230 essentially, it says that for platforms they cannot be held liable to what users published on

them. and it makes sense as a concept, right? if, if you are you tube and someone post a threat towards someone else, you should not be legally liable for that. additionally, if someone violates someone else's copyright on your website, that's not you who has posted it. you are simply hosting the platform when trump was in office, he actually extended an executive order that would force platforms like facebook to choose where they were platform and publishers. it did not get rid of section $230.00, but it simply claimed that if a platform like twitter wanted to have those protections, they could not be simultaneously. editorial lising their content, like a publisher with you. i thought that was a great executive order that actually, you know, enforced an already existing law was not legislating as a president bite and actually struck that down. so that is no longer in place. we have seen democrats kind of come together with publicans when it comes to things like anti trusts, but from people like you will see within them credit party. we've actually seen them try to pressure facebook and places like that were more censorship. so i don't

even know if there's bipartisan opposition to big text and scroll when it comes to free speech. specifically, i don't think people are on the same page. or if there's one thing we can all agree on as the site isn't going anywhere anytime soon. great insight to consider lauren at 10. thank you so much for your time. thanks for having me. thinking with the big tech attorney general's form, 36 states and the district of columbia have filed lawsuit against google, edging a competitive practices in its place store, which allows users to download apps for its android operating system, which is run on more than 80 percent of smartphones worldwide. now the suits focus on the control google has over its app store, where it can collect commission of up to 30 percent on transactions made within downloaded apps. go face increase scrutiny over the last year due to with novalink behavior, including lawsuits over legit abuses of its search engine and given preferential treatment to with digital ad network which accounts for roughly $100000000000.00 in

revenue for the company each year. the the stand off between saudi arabia and the u. a. e continued feeling concerns that it could impact both the state of oil around the world. 1 in the future of opec has we know it, they deadlock remains after the u. a. e objected to the plan to pull back on production cuts based on the 2018 baseline. the country is arguing that it has poured billions into developing crude reserves, and it is currently being forced to sacrifice more than 30 percent of its supplies to stay in line with cartel rules. it's working fears that you, the cuts will stay in place and there won't be enough supplies to keep up with the demand or countries like the way he could go their own way and flood the market with supplies. so we'll saudi arabia give in and could this lead to the end of opec all together? joining us now to go further in depth on this is david mckelvey,

the ceo of mckelvey financial groups. now david, let's start here with oil prices. they were lower in early thursday trading, but interestingly enough, the drop wasn't about opec, but instead it was about the demand side of the equation. now our analyst expecting demand of oil to go back down again now that countries like japan are imposing new lockdown measures. it's a combination of trader concern with a dysfunctional opec plus, specifically, what if the organization fractured an extra supply, came to market in the mad scramble for market share. vast scenario, creating a glove supply would see significant downside pressure on oil. the other ex factors you mentioned is colby resurgence. so the variance like delta lambda epsilon, these things raise fears of new shut down. and the various responses you might see around the world remains to be seen how policy makers are going to deal with that.

we have our number of individuals vaccinated at this point, and i think there's also a concern about fatigue. the fatigue of the fact of the policy makers should bear in mind. nevertheless, you have japan and south korea. they do focus the attention force or the potential worst case scenario and a returned to 2020 of but i think one thing that you can take heart from at this point is that global equity markets certainly do not reflect those kinds of extreme concern. and david oil, as we know, it's priced on the global market. so at this point, is there any hope for a new deal between opec members? what is the likelihood that the u a will get the new baseline or the higher quotes requesting? it's an interesting question. the saudis obviously don't want to budge. it says the very top precedent for the other opec members. and i think you have to keep in mind there's some extra baggage with the enron in the saudis, with some speculation on how those 2 are going to handle development of hydrogen resources and coming years. and so, i mean, really,

the simple issue is market share and capturing as much of a financial benefit as possible. as soon as possible. the concerns over the long term, the carbon is ation. they're emerging. and so when you think of the a, you know, they're running 4000000 barrels a day and they want to increase to 5000000 barrels a day. they're investing to do that. increase of 25 percent production over the next 10 years. and they're looking at basic math, they've got 50 years worth of oil at those kinds of run rates, assuming a $98000000000.00 uncertain dollar. 98000000000 barrel proven reserves. and there are and cs to diversify their well generating capacity away from oil in the timeframe where hydrocarbons are still a part of the global economy. they've got to ramp up production. opec doesn't want them to do that, but they've got to rip up production and build out a more broadly diversified economy as quickly as possible. so, you know, they're constrained by opec, and specifically, saudis are at odds with their at odds with the mercedes wanting to maximize curt

revenues for future planning. now we're talking about all the players here. also have to ask, where does the u. s stand? i mean, u. s. shell producers have been hesitant to boost output even as prices have search and opec has remained in that deadlock. so why is the u. s. coming to the rescue here, so to speak? well, remember that only a year ago the u. s. o, a patch was dealing with negative and low double digit crude for, for the, for the, for their industry. creditors have laid down the law and balance sheet reconstruction is the current priority. so between shareholder payouts and balance sheet repair, those are the prior over production. again, paying attention to shareholders and creditors, that's why production is constrained. it's fascinating right now to see hedge losses mounting for us. producers. 2021 shale production. a good part of it was hedged at $42.00 a barrel. so the fact that we're over 70, it doesn't really matter except that the cost to hedge it's,

it's gone against the producer, the u. s. producers. so that in itself is interesting to move off of 77 here recently looks like a cell signal off of overbought conditions. and but back to the hedging issue, they've already lost 7 and a half $1000000000.00 in the 1st half of the year. from that positioning, and we know that money talks always grand inside is always david mckelvey, thank you for your time today. good to be with you and can say the software vendor at the center of the ransomware attack that is affected to as many as 1500 companies. and at least 17 nations worldwide was actually warned in april of vulnerability that was eventually taken advantage of by the hackers. the dutch institute for vulnerability disclosure published a bug blog post this week, saying it found 7 croner abilities in the company system and informed them of their findings. the d i v d says the after notifying could say of the issues they waited for a patch to pick the vulnerability, knowing that it could be exploited and quote,

compromised a large number of computers managed by the vendor. now for their part can say a has not commented on this specific situation, but told the wall street journal, the organization had been a great partner and that they value the service they provide. wow, it always seems like after we have a massive cyber attack knowledge and we hear about the warnings that happened beforehand. i mean, you can say actually do anything in response to these warning. actually they did. they did update to patches and one in april, 1 in may, but took care of some of those vulnerabilities. but the d v d is very specific to say they, they did this so urgently. and they also have pointed out that they don't like to go pub to say what still is vulnerable and what was vulnerable at the time. because that emboldened the hackers to do what they might do. and they also don't go public beforehand because again, that the issue, but what they did mention is that if they find those vulnerabilities, it's likely that a hacker has also found those vulnerabilities. yet the hackers are right there with

them. and as seems to always be the case, and timed out for a quick break, but when we come back, said crypto currency regulation be on the horizon in the united states top us wall maker. sure hope. so we'll bring you the details and talk about the current slide in the sector. that's going to break. here are the numbers of the quote ah ah ah, national episode, summer solutions today we're talking with john beano of dollars collapse dot com stay in the right 2021 has been the year of the i word inflation. even the central bank is mentioning inflation. is it transitory? however, as the central bank is arguing,

or are we going to see something worse coming forward in the next year or 2? ah, sure, don't want to leave you with this notion move. what we knew, he will tell when she gets home ready to love me because she knew where she could go up or what i was for me. sure. you can totally traditional machines, etc. if you see the one you need from me was upset for me last week with the metro. okay. shoot. i

wish i checked the deal and that is what i need the new new new which is what i did yesterday. i do see executable couple. once it went up, when i got the seat up, when i got it up on that, got mixed up with me . ah, the air welcome back. a high profile us law maker believes it's about time for some

sort of crypto currency regulation in the country center. elizabeth warren, who chairs the senate banking subcommittee on economic policy issued a statement, thursday, warning of the risks of the quote, highly opaque and volatile crypto market. warren writes that as the crypto space becomes more and more main stream, it leaves quote, ordinary investors at the mercy of manipulators and fraudsters. adding that financial regulators must address the risk and congress should close any regulatory gaps, sen, war, and also wrote a letter to securities and exchange commission or commission chair gary gansler on wednesday, asking him to respond these concerns by the 28th of july and to discuss this and some other crypto news of the day. let's bring in boom, but co host christiane. and jeffrey tucker, contributor with real clear market pleasure to have you both on today to talk about this christie. i want to start with you. it seems like the same criticism we hear over and over again about crypto. again, coming from a u. s. lawmaker,

is there anything new here from elizabeth moore or what do you make of all of it? not really. it's really the same rhetoric over and over again. and it's funny how she points to these specific instances. she talks about crypto currency, specifically that is used for scamming, poor investors. it is used to assist criminals and also the fact that it works and the climate crisis. so, i mean, if we break this down a little bit in terms of skimming investors fishing attacks nigerian print scans, those have existed way before the advent of crypto. and let's not forget the pinks, get pink slip scans and the penny stock scans that were sold to uninformed investors boiler room style that existed in the equity market also way before the advent of the crypto currency market. so i really don't see her trying to tackle any of those issues when it comes to that. and in terms of assisting criminals, let's not forget, once again that the us dollar is undoubtedly the number one preferred currency for criminals. and this is a fact, this is

a fact by the united nations office on drugs and crime that publish that over 2 trillion dollars of u. s. dollars are used annually in terms of money laundering and drug trafficking, not crypto currency. so simply by simply stating that it's just a smear campaign on crypto currency, trying to give it a bad reputation when it's just simply not true. and finally, in regards to climate change, i mean, do we have to pull up that chart again? seeing that the banking industry actually consume more than double the amount of power as the vic coin industry. so every single thing that she stays is just simply non factual. and it's more of a political rhetoric simply because it's a very hot topic now rather than actual based actually based on facts. a lot of political writers there are no jeffery, there's also been a lot of talk about regulations. but is this a lack of understanding of the inherent, do you centralize nature of crypto currency? i mean, what would regulation in the world, the biggest economy actually mean for crypto?

well, it's not entirely clear, but i mean, you know, in terms of the price of fact, actually i think it would mean absolutely nothing. we've been through all these years, 7 years of the wild threats. we're going to make crypto behave exactly like currency or like a security, we're going to, we're going to ran it in and make the subject to all the usual regulations. that hasn't happened to cap. they actually cannot happen for, for a number of reasons. one is encrypted and they resistance these sorts of things. you can only end up doing damage better than, than helping anyone. she talked to manipulation of prod, you know, a good way to not be manipulated or be defrauded. is to avoid the sector entirely. which anyone this free to do? one of the reasons people really like crypto currency is it's, it's a democratic way for people to participate in financial markets. which comes of course with certain risks. but tentative warren doesn't want to talk about that or think that way, she just wants to go back to the old days where government was in charge of

everything. but here's another problem, which we sometimes forget, a big credit all come to grants, who are global instruments, financial instruments, and protocols of ownership for the entire world. so in to some extent, you know, the, the us senate and us regulators can, can only affect the status of crypto in this country. and even then only the on ramp from the off ramps, but they can't do anything about the rest of the world. so the completed loss and i get it. this really frustrates people like senator warren, but again, you know, one of the appeals of big coin and credit occurrences of block chain technology is that it, it tend to evade control by the nation state. seems to be the goal all around now. christie, bitcoin is down more than 6 percent in just 24 hours. and ether is down nearly 10 percent. so what is driving the latest price action, and is it likely to last?

well, it's more sort of a global risk off days, and a lot of the bad sentiment in the u. s. equity market is bleeding over into crypt does. so there is a lot of talk that there's a global slowed down now caused by the spread of delta variance. and especially since the japan has also recently declared a state of national emergency ahead of the olympics. so there is this fear, and there is a slow down and there's, there's a lot of negative sentiment also coming from china, given their latest crackdown and their war on crypto currency. but none of that is actually really new news. so i think it's just a little bit of the overhang coming from the latest cell off. and we have to also remember that this step really isn't that big of a deal because in the face, so 50 percent drop a 10 percent. nothing. and then the past 3 days since the 4th of july we've had bit coin and all the all coin also rally up about 30 percent. so i think right now it's more of a risk off day. traders are taking a little bit a bit of a gain from the long weekend holiday where everything popped about 30 percent. and a lot of the old coins that have gotten back the most in the sell off. now how the

biggest opportunity. so what we're seeing now is a bit of a rotation people are taking and using bitcoin and ether sources, capital in order to fish. a lot of these very cheap all points that now have the biggest opportunities and biggest returns in jeopardy. i got 30 seconds for you here, but i got a quick question. you know, big point is often been seen as a hedge to inflation, but that doesn't seem to be the case right now, quickly. why is that? well, i think it's just a delayed reaction. i mean, investors are not convincing patients coming back to the death come back in a big way and it's sustainable. and it's proved to be more robust than just the incidental related to post locked on world. big one is definitely going to benefit from that. i don't think there's no question about it. i mean this, it is digital gold. i think we've established that, but so that's a delayed reaction. i mean, everything, chris, you just said was exactly right. we're, we're in a pause moment and a to exactly these moments where the media just loves encrypted is terrible,

terrible. and they can do that probably because they're going to last for a little while. jeff, or we got to go boom. but chris, the jeffrey tucker, author of liberty are locked down. thank you both for your time. thank you. and that's it for the time you can get boom bus on demand on the portable tv app available on smartphones, tablets, google play in the apple app store by searching for a portable tv, portable tv. you can also download it on samsung, smart tv and roku devices. or simply check it out portable tv we'll see you next time. me ah, ah, and out of the international mega science research project night is being built into . its goal is to allow the scientists to study matter, as they believe it existed just after the big bang that formed the solution. and the order for the

delivery authority. one is not $13.00, deal it clear to teach as a month or summer. go out and we just go play that niga evolution zillow. i hear from go that i don't watch the movies. we just please, could you spell that? ah, the last, the end appears to be, or washington's 20 year half or 2 nation bill in afghanistan was always going to end this way, a complete and total failure. it is doubtful. the corrupt government in kabul will last long after the american withdrawal of dennis and remains broken and the american people poor and no one is held to account

ah, today, industries, pieces 2000000 euros in the regulations. i will be all about making money. i think it's about the corporation international markets import export. do you imagine the number of the diseases that are in every family today due to new viruses or new microbes? that's true. so it is due to environment. lots of not going to take either the momentum, much time with abilene. yes. accumulate. going to come in today. they don't allow us. the food industry is successful. we'll create more jobs. it will create more value added. it will create more. so i don't see why we shouldn't also fight for the interests of the industry that we have regulation. we want the regulation as

the industry and if we don't behave then yes, that's fine. ah ah, a mission far from complete, but president biden confirm the us will be all of us get this done by the end of next melt, leaving the country to fend for itself. we accomplish right and the responsibility that began people alone to decide their future. and how they want to run their country. meanwhile, as refugees continue to leave that country in, think a new life in europe, the brutal rape and murder of a 13 year old girl in austria of the homes of an afghan migrant. once again, that's the issue of immigration firmly back in the spotlight. the wind of the sport hits belgium over a french clothes. the build off sure turbines.