for their alleged involvement in the fighting in eastern grain. but this extradition never happens because shortly after the incident report started to surface that this could have been a plot orchestrated by kia and i remember how present valerie, alexander lucas, and going vladimir putin. they were on the phone and initially the negotiations between these 2 lead to these fighters being sent back to russia, the russian security officials, what they want is a transparent investigation into all this. the crania and authorities are not interested and impartial investigation of this affair. all the facts which cnn has now confirmed serve as fresh evidence. ukraine commits acts of state terrorism by the hands of a secret service minced in moscow. the relations between these 2 were never spoiled, as well as perhaps the c. i wanted, even though the c,

i are denying their involvement in all this. but as you can see, we keep getting back to the story because of and new details emerging. we send our own request to the us intelligence for whether they can comment on that. we're waiting for their reply and possibly we'll also get reaction to this from other high ranking officials here in russia and ukraine or in the us. and that brings us up today to more news in about 15 minutes. the next class in the news. this is boom, but the one business show you can't afford to miss bret jabbar. and i'm rachel watkins in washington coming up the fcc,

continuing as pressure campaign against the crypto currency sector by threatening to point will discuss the latest claims in the ongoing crackdown plot australia high court says media companies are responsible for the comments made by the public on their post, we'll take a look at what the major ruling could mean to the future of social media. and in the wake of a qu, him guinea that has upset aluminum market. could we soon see china turn to this out later on where to take a look at be under how the unrest is affecting global supply chain? in fact, so today was that right in the and we leave the program with regulators in the united states planning to file a lawsuit against one of the world's largest crypto currency exchange in the securities and exchange commission has notified coin based global that it will

through the exchange if it moves forward with plans to allow users to earn interest lending digital assets. the news was announced in a statement from coin basis chief legal officer, who said the lender product would be delayed until at least october. while the fcc says it doesn't actually comment on quote, the existence or non existence of possible investigations. chairman garrick gary gambler has previously characterized the crypto space as the wild west and said some of the products offered by trading platforms, bring them under scc oversight. meanwhile, tuesday was a while day for the world's most popular crypto currency. as el salvador became the 1st country to adopt bit quinn as legal tender. now while there were issues with the roll out, bit coins price faced a wild, swaying, plunging from $50000.00 to just below $43000.00, but has regained some of those losses moving into wednesday. other proper tokens like a theory. i'm x

r p also follow the similar trends on all of that news. so for more on this, let's bring in boom by co host chris d i and michelle snyder. he's a partner of and director of training research and education at mark gauge, dot com. christy, i want to start with you from what we know about this situation. why is the fcc taking issue with this plan from coin base and beyond the delay? how are they responding? while apparently the fcc has said that some digital assets and platforms are operating ads are offering security, which brings them under the fcc oversight. now, previously, they've characterized all points securities until their team does not coin they see brian armstrong. now defeating the view that the lending product is the security under the purview of the he tween on wednesday and a 21 post read detailing the fcc feelings with the firm saying that there has been some really sketchy behavior coming out of the fcc. recently, armstrong, explain that coin they approached fcc earlier this year to them on the up and

coming coin with lead program. basically just offered a 4 percent annual yield on the part of your dc. nothing too fancy. so i'm found that sep, responded by telling them that the lending program is a security without any explanation. and so they refused to tell us why they think it the security and then the peanut under records from demanded testimony from our employees. and then tell us that they will be suing if we proceed to launch isn't 0 explanation as to why. now point basis chief legal are also disagrees. the fcc, a key question, be assertion that the lemming feature can be deemed as an investment contract or a note because customers wouldn't be investing in the program, rather lending us the scene that they currently hold on. so the only clarification that the firm has been provided so far is that the lending program is currently being under the how we test the how is security test. so according to the tweet,

the fcc won't share the assessment of the test itself. only the fact that they have done it. now, michelle, i want to go back to gamblers, wild west characterization of the criptos space. we know those in the industry have pushed back against regulation. so does this really fall into the peer review of the scc and in your opinion, should they be regulating the different aspects of the business? well, just to jump a little bit on what kristi just said, because it is a very thorough answer that addresses that. essentially it does bring into the question, what is the security and what's unprecedented? the balance is, is that the fcc wants to control every aspect of the chris, both chris, the space, which they don't do in other places, in terms of banking regulation and the overall stock market. yes, they deal with the securities, but not everything that goes into the different companies. and that's an essence what they're trying to do. so what does that really have as an impact?

well, 1st of all, it would be a long way coming with that really does happen. but it turns a whole crypto space into not only something that's way more political, which the whole idea of crypto current used to be a political. it puts on regulations to the point that will choke innovation, definitely disrupt the free market for traders. and basically becomes a barrier to entry to the smaller companies that might want to try to get into the space. so in essence, his while with comment really will change the whole nature of the business. because the whole idea is why was maybe a wonderful little hyperbolic metaphor. but the truth of the matter is it's there for a reason. and it definitely definitely means that terms of the whole block chain technology, this innovation that we're seeing, what gets faithful, i hope that there isn't actually come to pass. yeah, you definitely have some crypto users going, wait a 2nd. you're saying while the us like it's a bad thing because i mention,

i know we've talked a lot about all salvatore and about the price swings amid the country's 1st day of bitcoin adoption. so what exactly happened to create all of that price movement, and are we close to stabilizing full thing? and so it wasn't really even leave to solve it. are sure it was a little bit of by the room or sell the news kind of thing with all photos adopting the coin and make legal tender for the 1st time. but in essence, it's really one thing about them in the 1st place. it was just another leverage, create a blow out a consequence. on tuesday, the point crashed about $9000.00 due to this massive unwinding of leverage trader the borrowers who bought in on the news that was going to be officially launch bitcoin. and basically in a conflict domino effect positions unwound to create this cascade of liquidation and positive feedback loop, which severely impacted pricing. so even though open interest was just crazy,

high spot margin borrowing was also peaking, which then also led up to the crash. so strong buying then been suggesting that cold feet among the real big point homeless they were not involved in this event, according to will map, which is a program that track large picked a wallet, large volume investors who are also new commercial market. so these are investors freshly into the criptos. they were actually the vast majority of the high pressure . so also worth noting the job and one sided with a very sharp spike in the us dollars. and next the d x, y on tuesday as well. the x y benefit from the rising us treasury, we'll have the government debt sale this week, which includes $15000000000.00 a 3 year. nope, 38000000000 and 10 year notes and $24000000000.00 in 30 year bob. and now michelle, with all of this swing that did happen, and of course this news regarding the fcc and coin base. how are crypto and block chain related stocks reacting to this?

or what so interesting is that you can really divide the space into stocks that deal with the space like the mining stocks that have no actual coin exposure. and then of course, the companies like micro strategy that have direct cohen exposure. and what's interesting is that the mining companies, everything has come down, but they're actually holding up pretty well as a result of that. in fact, actually probably offering a new buy opportunity because they were getting a little rich in terms of the companies like square and micro strategy. they actually peaked in late in early august. i have come down since. so if you look at something like micro strategy, it's down $30.00 from the high $20.00 over the last couple of days. but it's coming into majors support here. so i would actually think that if we're looking just as big coin as a sort of grandaddy coin, if we can stabilize around this $46000.00 level, some of these other coin based companies like a micro strategy and

a square marathon is quite a few well, actually present a new and cheaper buy opportunity and if we look at coin itself, c o i n, even with all the new that also has come down, but it's reaching a very critical support area around $250.00. so we have our eyes on it. we think that's why african entity boom bus christy i. michel snyder of market gauge dot com . thank you both for breaking this all down for today. you thank you. debate over who should be held liable for the comments posted on social media has taken unprecedented turn over and australia after the countries high court ruled it's the media companies themselves who are responsible for the comments from members of the public left on social media posts after they post a story or a report. now the move full force media companies to drastically increase the policing of comments made on their pages. but it also raises the question, could companies or even individual social media managers be sued for comments they

didn't know existed? well, joining us now to discuss it and investigative journalist spends on now been, can you break down this ruling for us? where did this case originate? yeah, so we did that, you mentioned it originated in australia, a guy named dylan waller, who apparently was a subject of several different news reports about youth detention. and so he had these different news reports that were run about him and then commenters were commenting underneath the story as they do on social media. essentially saying things about him, which apparently were unflattering or unkind, which he believes were defaming him. and so he suit, but what's fascinating about this is essentially the court has looked at it and said yes, that the company's the media companies like the, you know, the sydney morning herald, are able to be held liable for comments that users make on those particular facebook pages, even though that company doesn't own facebook,

right. rupert murdoch doesn't on facebook, yields the sydney morning herald. and yet he is responsible, according to this court, for whatever people write on facebook. facebook is not responsible, but the media companies who created the page are well, and it's very interesting this entire story because when you look at the landscape of social media and how it relates to traditional media, where they're trying to get more content out there, they rely on those comments because the comments push the algorithm that push it out to further more further, more people. so this could become a huge problem because a lot of companies, especially in the media have transition to be so social media heavy. now, why does the court believe that media companies are responsible for comments left on these stories? what they're saying is that essentially the companies themselves have become publishers, which is a fascinating kind of take on it. because if you think about there's this, that's been ahead in the united states over whether or not social media platforms themselves are publishers or are they platforms, right?

that's the argument that won't show you what they're saying is that the publisher becomes anyone who creates a page. so you're making an interesting point here. brent, which is that if it's a media company that puts up a facebook page and you allow comments on that page and you're right to drive the algorithm because the more engagement, the more likely more common, the more shares you get on a social media post the better it does. so you want that kind of interaction. if you're now legally responsible for that, that's a huge problem. how do you move forward as a company? but it also raises another question. am i as an individual, when i create a facebook page? now a publisher of that page and now liable for anything that anyone else says on that page. yeah, it seems like there's really so much gray area there. when you take into account what comments are being made? of course, what's allowed, what's not allowed. like in that case, you said the guy was just, he didn't like the comments that were being made about him. so to be clear here, under this ruling, the media companies are the publishers of the comments left by facebook users. so

how will that impact media companies posting on social media overall? well, once that will do is it will roll be move into a phase where you're not allowed to comment on storage. and that's already happening by the way, that when this original case came forward, facebook did not yet have the ability for you to disable comments that has changed . and since then, so these companies are already doing that. they're going to turn off all of their comments. you won't be able to comment on their, on their pages, but it does leave again, a bigger question. if, if facebook is not the publisher, and yet these entities are publishers. here's a question for you. you have facebook employing fact checkers all over their, their platform are those fact checkers when they say something about a piece of content or a person, are they now guilty of defamation if they've done that, and if they, whether rightfully or wrongfully done. so that raises another question as well. it really is going to come down to whether or not the platforms themselves are protected or is everyone who uses the platform now available to be sued for

defamation. because if it is, i can see a lot of people stepping away from facebook altogether and, but i only have a short, quick time here for this answer. but the question, i have a new all of this that you're raising here, especially when we talk about rupert murdoch company through the divisive figure politically. what if people just don't like the content of the city morning harold, and they want to go and write defaming comments on their if they're not held responsible and then they might hold the, the publisher responsible? yeah, absolutely. i mean, why wouldn't you do that? and so it sounds like a great strategy, if you don't like a company, you would go out there and do this because again, you as the user, this was incredible. the person who posted the comment is not being sued. that the platform that hosted the comment is not being sued. the publisher who wrote a story and put it on a page and other people commented on it. and even if you didn't even know the comment was there, you're still liable for it. so yeah, it creates a really messy area. i'm not sure how i'll show your plans to move forward with

this. but i guess the bigger question here guys is, does this get adopted in other countries as well? to be interesting to see if that happens? yeah, definitely be interesting to see where this one goes and if the united states picks up a note or 2 from their new ruling investments on thank you for your insight on this one. think i'm out for a quick break, but when we come back, the unrest in guinea continued to rattle. aluminum market is china. begin to see other options to fuel consumption. we break it all down on the other side. that's a good break here. the number, the quote me ah, ah, and the realities experience or even live in like say role or does my dear you know,

especially during and damage where you can go anywhere in the game world, go everywhere, you know, choose the game that you want any open roll game, choose it, and you are now on a vacation in a place where you're like flying helicopters or you're, you're on beaches, you're, you're in a city drive, you know, what are the car you want, you know, your name as these? these are getaways. i the civic leg around the world expedition 5000 miles round the clock and the dead calm. miss wilson in michigan, as every country close by it was like the crew. gavin's food and water harbor

to go to check those for shelter. later on, the little thing is got everybody locked down the rear home or no food. you know what about that? only give them up. so can somebody call me, especially in the cove in your living like the theme in of own but in the 21st century. the way the u. s. government funded is through the issue of treasury bond and they pay the interest on those bonds by collecting taxes. who owns most of those bonds? it's virtually all those bonds, the top 110th of one percent. so the government simply becomes a pastor mechanism for people to pay money from their pockets through something

called taxes that are just a thickly that hides the transgression mechanism of your money through the government into those who own these bond the welcome back. military leaders in the west african nation of guinea are calling for mining companies to keep operating, falling a coup that sent aluminum prices skyrocketing. the immediate closure of all borders sparked beers that it could have a massive impact on the countries wealth of natural resources. at a time when the world is already facing a supply shortage. but leaders of the newly formed national committee for re orientation and development are sharing the public that it has plans to create a unity government placing civilians in power with guinea as one of the world's top

box site producers. the military is assuring it will remain open for export and that a curfew in mining areas has been lifted to ensure that production will continue. so joining us now to discuss later, professor richard wal posted economic update and author of the sickness is the system professor. it's great to have you back on the show today, and it appears that the market was reacting to the threat of aluminum production being impacted before it was seriously impacted. does this kind of disruption show what could happen if local tensions have an effect on global supply? absolutely, this is a warning. you know, we are living through a time of enormous economic stress. food prices, for example, have risen over 20 percent in many parts of africa. these are societies that cannot cope with that kind of a rise in the price of basic foods. the tensions of

a shift here in our own country, but also around the world. so that these are happening, this is not the 1st one this year in africa, and i doubt it will be the last it disrupt supply chains. it sends terror in the minds and hearts of the people who depend on, in this case, the box idea aluminum producers around the world. you never know in each case how serious it is, how long it will last, how deep the civil war might become around this. but let's assume it can be managed the way the new leaders want to. it is still a warning. it is still a situation where there will be disruptions, even though it's only for a few days. there will be price effect. there will be decisions taken in china and elsewhere to adjust to all of this. and if you multiply it by the $75.00 to $100.00 countries that are more or less in this situation than you are being introduced to

a level of economic turmoil in the world economy. that is going to be settling in and be with us for quite a while. and professor wolf, it's estimated that china has invested over a $100000000000.00 in africa and recent years with guinea actually receiving a significant significant amount in exchange for box like concessions. does that recent qu illustrate the dangers associated with those types of investments from a country like china? absolutely, you can be sure that in beijing, as we are speaking, they are not alternative sources. they are trying to figure out how long they disruptions here may last. they are, they are learning the lesson that i'm urging everyone to, to take from this. we live in a very d stabilize economic system. one part of that used to run the world, the united states is and i have to say it is in decline. another behemoth,

another giant, china is rising. all of this is shifting loyalties, political and economic. and you're going to see this kind of turmoil explode like the, the weakest link in the global chain of the world economy. now speaking and looking for those alternative sources, we know that it has plenty of its own resources, but china still relies on guinea for nearly half of its bach sites supply, which is used for aluminum. and there's talk that if supply is disrupted, it could force china to then turned australia. and we know that there are also some political disputes and tensions between those 2 countries. so is australia likely to agree in order to fill in really that global gap? i think you're going to see that they may not be public about it because you have a fairly right wing government in australia that has carved out a very strong anti chinese position. and they probably don't want to be seen going

back on it. but they have to, because they need china more than china needs them. and here is an opportunity. they can get the chinese to reopen, for example, their market for australian wine. if the australians make available the box, i very may need to replace what came from, from gain a and on the basis of those kinds of deals, which will be made quietly, just like the united states is currently making all kinds of quiet deals with china as well, i think that's what you're going to see. and then at some later point, it will be revealed what has been going on. and i want to go back to what we were just talking about there, with the destabilization in the region. and you know, we know that, like, as we just discussed, that china has made a heavy investment in the region that multi nationals are running a lot of the mines that, that are in guinea. the question becomes,

what the region be as the stabilize, if it wasn't all of these outside influences, taking those those resources out. you know, it's a wonderful question, but it's one of those great questions for which i had no idea how to give you an answer for that. it's one of these counterfactual. so good question to ask because it sends you in the direction of realizing that these are very distorted economies in dna, for example, as in most african countries, 2 or 3 products are everything for the economy. something goes wrong at any one of them. and the whole economy is plunged into a disaster. it's a kind of crew is on the economics that you don't want to put all your economic eggs in one basket. you want to have diversity. you want to have something to offset a downturn. here with an upturn there, these countries do not have that luxury. and part of the reason is the power of the

wealth that those big corporations can take out and then distribute enough money among the local politicians to keep their franchise going. and that, of course, is a recipe for the kind of periodic explosion that has shown us in the last few days . and we know it's certainly one of those cases where we've got the united states, the us, china, and russia all actually agreeing on something for once. so hopefully they can get everything together and it won't affect the global supply too much. professor richard will thank you so much for your time and insight. thank you. and finally, a bank. the painting that was destroyed, i guess you could say, as it was auctioned off 3 years ago with back up for sale. you will remember the now viral moment from 2018 when the mysterious artist girl with a balloon was sold for $1400000.00 and immediately shredded its freight. the piece now actually titled with the change love is in the been,

will hit the block again at the b london on the 14th of october. and get this. the work is now expected to fetch as much as 6 times what it went for back in 2018, with expectations of selling for between $5.00 and $8000000.00. the original sale of $1400000.00 was a record price for a bank. the at the time, but demand has risen quite a bit since then a bank, the honoring the british health care service set a new record of $20000000.00 earlier this year. okay, so the question now becomes you pay a $1000000.00 for this picture. do you then shred the rest of it, or do you have to hope that maybe it'll go off again and maybe it'll shred the rest of it? i never even thought of that, rachel, it could possibly happen. i'm just waiting to find out what's happening with frankly, i mean, we're still waiting for that up there to fit for the boom bug on demand on the portable tv app available on smartphones and tablets. the legal play and the apple app store by searching portable tv. portable tv can also be downloaded on samsung,

smart tv, and roku devices, or simply check it out at portable doc tv. we'll see you next to me while i make no, certainly no borders and the blind number t's as emerge. we don't have authority. we don't the whole world to take action and be ready. people are the judge, you know, crisis we can do better. we should be better. everyone is contributing each in our 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 president by don't get the whole reception from the american public. i made over his handling of the gun is pull out the 20th of last year of $911.00 approaches. he explored the legacy of america, was tara, in a series of special reports. today we hear from families who saw loved ones killed in a wisdom us the 1st time in cobbled time, the head of the family that has lost.