the ah ah, i use the the this is been bus, so if you can't afford to miss, i'm rachel 11. that bridge a board watching thing coming up. arrest in the court to impose punitive damages

on these social media giants. we're going to hold the 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 sue and what sequentially. if any, it could have. then we turned to the oil sector where 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 re do. lation does unsustainable. well, 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 investor journalist benson has the story originally trumpet,

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 or acting as quote, state actors. here's part of what from send an apprentice 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 well. the problem, of course, is that so far, 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?

why 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 then 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 laura, and i know that you're very critical of the way to social media is handled by many of these big companies at 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

a 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 public square and an area for public discussion. so it's very strange to me, how a core consignments heinously 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 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 ads that are run on the social media platforms. those are subjects 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 that even i think, went so far as you and was it somali a band or remove a tweet from the actual president. like i said, i don't think that this last 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 tech companies have the best lawyers money can buy. and i think it's just pragmatically, even if they were successful, because trumpets 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 deserves. 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 criticize for acting as publishers while enjoying the protections of a platform. now, even though there was a push during the trump and ministration to take away their legal immunity, if they act as publishers, does the 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 a tech platforms like facebook to choose where they were platform and publisher. it did not get rid of section $230.00, but it simply claimed that if a platform like twitter wanted to have those protections that could not be simultaneously editorializing 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 trust. but from people like you will see within them credit party, we've actually seen them try to pressure facebook and places like that. we're more censorship. so i don't even know if there's bipartisan opposition to be 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 of the site isn't going anywhere anytime soon. great insight to consider lauren at chance. thank you so much for your time. thanks for having me. thinking with the big tech attorney general's point, 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 commissions of up to 30 percent on transactions made within downloaded apps. was faced increased scrutiny over the last year due to its not

ballistic behavior, including lawsuits over legit abuses of its search engine and given preferential treatment to with digital ad network which accounts for roughly 100000000000 dollars 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, as we know it, they deadlock remains after the u. a. e objected to the plan to pull back on production cuts based on a 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, the financial groups. now david, let's start here with oil prices. they were lower in early thursday trading, but interestingly enough to 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 trade or concern with a dysfunctional opec plus, specifically, what if the organization fractured and extra supply came to market in the mad scramble for market share. that 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 res, fears of new shut down and various responses can 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 that 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 return to 2020. 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 concerns. 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 sets us a very tough precedent for the other opec members. and i think you have to keep in

mind there's some extra baggage with the bodies and 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 just 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 department is ation there, emerging. and so when you think of the a, you know, they're running for a 1000000 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 rate. assuming an id, a $1000000000.00 uncertain a $1.98 barrel proven reserves. and there are janasia 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 a 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. i mean, they're 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 of the u. s. coming to the rescue here, so to speak? well, remember that only a year ago the u. s. 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 to 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, really looks like a cell signal off of over by 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 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 thing about 7 kroner 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 fix 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, then we hear about the warnings that happened beforehand. i mean, to say, actually do anything in response to these warning. actually they did. they did update 2 patches in one in april, 1 in may, but took care of some of those vulnerabilities. but the d v d is very specific to say that 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 involved in 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 time now for a quick break, but when we come back, said crypto currency regulation be on the horizon in the united states top, us want make sure hope. so we'll bring you the details and talk about the current slide in the sector as we get a break. here are the numbers of the close. the me ah, me 100 make. no, certainly no borders and the blind number please. as

emerge. we don't have authority, we go to the back seat, the whole world needs to take action and be ready. not a joke. people are judge crisis, we can do better, we should be better. everyone is contributing each in their own way. but we also know that this crisis will not go on forever. the challenge is paid for the response has been massive. so many good people are helping us. it makes us feel very proud that we need together in the climate ag, jupiter. we found 25 years ago, took only 4 days to go around the stars, which means to finance is very close. so that was really the big surprise. and we

have learned since then. own system is maybe one amongst many. that's not the archetype that's not the stand out the way to our planet. and i'm of the shots because everybody was expecting the planet to look all the same. the, the, who's 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 gambler on wednesday, asking him to respond to these concerns by the 28th of july. and to discuss this and some other crypto news of the day, let's bring in boom bus, 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? really it's really the same rhetoric over and over again, and it's funny how she points to the specific instances as 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 worsens.

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 pink skin 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 published 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 big coin industry. so every single thing that she stays is just simply non factual. and it's more so of a political rhetoric simply because it's a very hot topic right 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 centralized nature of crypto currency? i mean, what would regulation in the world's biggest economy actually mean for crypto? well, it's not entirely clear but a bit mean, you know, in terms of the price of fact, actually i think it would mean absolutely nothing. had we been through all these years, 7 years of these wild threats were going to make crypto behave exactly like yacht 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 a crypto, and they are they resistant? these sorts of things. you can only end up doing damage rather 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 and which anyone is free to do. one of the reasons people really like crypto crises it's, it's a democratic way for people to participate in financial markets, which comes of course certain risks. but, but tentative warren doesn't want to talk about tab or think that way. she wants to go back to the old days where government was in charge for everything. but here's another problem which we sometimes forget, a big credit all come to grants is our global instrument, financial instruments, and protocols of ownership for the entire world. so into 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, there's one of the appeals of the coin encrypt currents is a block chain technology. is that it, it tend to evade control by the nation state. seems to be the goal all around. now . christie, the queen is down more than 6 percent and just 24 hours. an ether is down nearly 10 percent. so what is driving the latest price action, and is it likely to last? well, it's more of a global risk of days, and a lot of the bad sentiment in the equity markets is bleeding over into crypt, us. so there is a lot of talk that there's a global slow down now caused by the spread of delta variance. and especially since the japan has also recently declared

a state and national emergency ahead of the olympics. so there is this fear and there is a slow down. and there is 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 an 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 of 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 bitcoin and all the all coin also rally up about 30 percent. so i think right now it's more so of a risk off day. traders are taking a little bit bit of, again, from the long weekend holiday where everything popped about 30 percent. and a lot of the all coins that have gotten back the most in the sell off now had 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 point that now have the biggest opportunities and biggest returns in jeopardy. i got 32nd 40 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 and does come back in a big way and it's sustainable. and as proved to be more robust than just the incidental related to post locked on world, then big quinn 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, christie just had was exactly right. we're, we're in a pause moment and the to exactly the moment where the media love crypto. i see it's terrible. see a terrible and they can do that probably because the printer is gonna last for a little while jeff, are we gotta go boom by chris. the jeffrey soccer author of liberty were locked down. thank you both for your time. thank you. and that, that for the time you can get boom bus on demand on the portable tv app available on smartphones and tablets. google play in the apple app store by searching for

portable tv. portable tv can also be downloaded on samsung, smart tv, and roku devices, or simply check it out a portable doc tv. well see you next time. me the the the

the is your media a reflection of reality? the in a world transformed what will make you feel safer? type relation for community. are you going the right way or are you being somewhere direct? what is true? what is in a world or up did you need to descend the join us in the depths or remain in the shallows? i know

as part of the international mega science research project, neither is being built into its goal is to allow the scientists to study matter. they believe it existed just after the big bang get formed. ah, she's more flu shane and the order for the delivery authority at 113 deal it create each as a country montage bomb with some a glove that we just go play that niga. evolution zillow. here are some color that i don't want to even move this, who just plays credit, that he has the

the headlines 0 and if you have an optional taliban celebrates sweeping gains across gun us on including another border crossing that to us president confirms america will be out of the country by the end of next month, you know, mission accomplished. right? and the responsibility that can people alone decide their future and how they want to run their country. a lot of refugees continue to flee the country and seek a new life in europe. the brutal rape and murder of a 13 year old girl, the austria at the hands of an afghan migrant. once again, put to the issue of immigration back in the spotlight to haitian americans are among the suspects detained in connection with the.