Episode Transcript
[00:00:00] Out of cycle Update.
[00:00:03] A little bit of that, a little bit of this, and still yet no answers, or at least clear ones. CryptoTalk FM. My name is Leister. I am your host.
[00:00:11] I've got two parts on today's coverage.
[00:00:15] Part one is to give a couple of mentions. I'm not going to spend a lot of time on it because you can go and check it yourself.
[00:00:23] The Block Bag Investors Channel did their own internal AMA giving apparently status updates from information provided directly to them, allegedly from Anthony Turner. I suspect they came from Turner's boss. I can't prove that we know that Turner has a boss. Now we can kind of. We can kind of settle on the truth that Turner has a boss.
[00:00:44] A couple of things were mentioned in this internal AMA that I felt I would at least briefly mention, talk about.
[00:00:54] They were covering about the minors. They said that the contract was shown to them about the minors. They vetted it but could not share any information about it.
[00:01:02] Now I have a question. One, obviously Turner would have told him. If Turner's the one that gave it, Turner would have told him. This is not to be released. It's not to be distributed or disseminated or communicated.
[00:01:15] But Turner felt it confident to provide it to people outside of the circle, the inner circle.
[00:01:25] So when I say, when I say, and I know why he's doing it, he's doing it to try to project trust.
[00:01:33] But what I'm saying is that I question the value.
[00:01:37] You have this contract, you say that the investors at large should not be privy to this information.
[00:01:47] You're okay communicating to somebody who runs an organization called Black DAG Investors, ostensibly representing the investors. But the investors can't know the details. But the leader of this org can know the details. Like if you look at what's happening with the whole Black Lives Matter crap, right this, there were. There's multiple of it and I haven't followed it because it's stupid. It's a scam. But the point is you got these two chicks that, that were embezzling money out of it. And Candace Owens ran up on one of them and she went straight to the house that was. The funds were used for this lady's house. And then the lady lied, talking about she was threatening all this. But on the, on the side, it's like these are insiders to this and then they're siphoning money. So they're essentially scammers.
[00:02:35] I'm asking the open question for people listening. Chris CryptoTalks FM I want you to think about it as A basic question.
[00:02:43] Just make it make sense in your mind to, to quote the kids. Okay, you have an organization, block DAG investors, Anthony Turner and block DAG trusts, showing that information, the detailed information to the leader of the organization, where said organization says that they represent the community.
[00:03:06] But Turner apparently told, in this case, Reid, presumably you can't share this details with the community.
[00:03:15] So the people who lead the organization, ostensibly that represents the community can know details that the rest of the community can't know.
[00:03:24] Does that not sound shady to you? Like, that sounds shady to me. This is not an accusation. I'll read. It's not his fault. I'm saying that it's shady as shit.
[00:03:34] Why would you do that? Like, make it make sense?
[00:03:38] That's. I'm sorry, that's shady. That's like, okay, the mayor of a, of a, of a town, okay, we're gonna tell the mayor we're about to jack up the water supply over here.
[00:03:50] We got this company who's going to come in here and fix it, but for like a two weeks, we're going to jack up the water supply. But you can't tell any of the constituents, you can't tell any of the people. You can't let them know what's happening. You could tell them that we're working on it, but you can't tell the details about what's going on or what we're fixing or who's doing it. Doesn't that seem shady to you? That's what this is like. That doesn't make sense. It wouldn't be a problem if this were not an organization that presented that it represents the community. It wouldn't be a problem if you just had this LLC that was, let's say a high level investor off the side, and they're just, they're just so big money that it for them, the risk mitigation, it's like necessary and there's legal.
[00:04:31] Okay, I can, I can kind of sell that. But in this case, Reed said he formed it to try to help represent the community as a voice for them, but yet their community at large can't see the details that he can see. Again, this is not Reed's fault. He's doing what he's told because it's all they can do. They got to get something out of the dude. So far they've not gotten hardly anything out of him. That's why Binance stuff keeps saying lied and he's shady. Right? And I've said I think he has a boss. I don't Think it's him. I think he has a boss. I think his boss told him, this is what's going to happen if we do this. This is what's going to happen. This. The.
[00:05:08] And Turner's trying to put some information out, but at the end of the day, he has a boss anyway. So they were detailed about the miners. They reiterated what I said when I talked about the.
[00:05:21] The minor spec, and I said, at these specs, I don't see it realistic. The number of tokens that you said that you're gonna get. They basically reiterated that here. As far as some of the low wattage, obviously it's good for not killing your power bill, but in terms of the amount of mining that's gonna happen, you know, and they also talked about, you know, there's some white listing for miners that certain miners be whitelisted on the chain so that only they can mine. They mentioned that on one of the early ones, you know, we changed the algorithm to only do our stuff and then we did it in a way that our miners are the only ones that could mine. And here they were saying it'd be nice to have, you know, open that up to where multiple can mine. I don't know that that's a good idea per se.
[00:06:01] And I say that because it may open up risk of a 51 attack if somebody's really good enough. And I think the reason for the white listing is to avoid the chance that somebody could theoretically do that. Right? Because if you have them under spec'd, so they're under their throttled, they're under spec'd and you whitelist them and you control how they come in the algorithm, it helps mitigate the risk that anybody could, you know, perform such an attack or, you know, do something that's damaging to the chain. The opening of miners would be like a distant future state thing. You know, you're talking, let's say that it turned into something and then later it kind of can stand on its own to where it doesn't matter as much. And then you can kind of make a case by that point, it wouldn't be financially advantageous to do mining by that. By that point, there'd be no financial incentive to do it. It would not be.
[00:06:55] It just wouldn't make any sense. The price of black DAG would have to skyrocketed in order to make it make sense.
[00:07:00] To me, that's lofty vision. I don't share it. I say having it be isolated is actually a smart strategy and it wouldn't surprise me if Dr. Hurley talked about that at some point internally.
[00:07:13] But I think that's a smart strategy, is to kind of keep it controlled to make sure that there is no strong risk of the chain being compromised at some point. So I don't. There is one point I don't agree with the idea of opening up mining, but, you know, it is.
[00:07:29] It is what it is.
[00:07:32] They talked about money movement. They said that they saw us at least some. I think he said a million dollars. And obviously that's a low number in comparison.
[00:07:40] And this goes to my second part that I'll get to here a second later. But the, the point is they saw some money movement happening and it may be, by the way, that this money movement came from the same source. If the source that I had shared the same with with Reed, that's possible, I don't know.
[00:07:57] But he did see that money was being transferred. They talked about in the socials that there was. And he used the word malicious. I don't. Maybe it was, but I think it's really more a hostile. You know, it's kind of feels like a hostile takeover situation. Hostel is the word I would use. The idea that there's this organization that controls. And I covered that on one of the past ones where I said somebody brought to attention that on Reddit, that, yeah, these are not controlled by Turner. He has no control over that stuff, even the emails and everything else. And that trying to decouple that apparently, according to Reed, that there was some teeth pulling to try to get away from it. And on the way out, you know, it's like you have an apartment, they trash it on the way out the door. That they said it's something. That's my words. But that there was some issue trying to get away from the old and take over control of the socials and kind of clean it up.
[00:08:51] Doesn't surprise me because again, Turner has a boss and the boss doesn't want to leave. Right.
[00:08:57] They talked about tap miners, which again, I'm not in. That's a tele. Telescam. But they talked about the tap miners and apparently there's some company on a Russia that manages the channel where this is all done and they can't reach that organization, so they can't stop it and there's some way to cut it, but they haven't done deep and it wasn't a priority and reads like, well, if you can't even fix the socials, the other technical stuff's really not going to happen either. Which, yeah, that's Why I understand the tap miner, but it's like, yeah, consider. Is it really doing anything right? Does it. Does it matter? Does it really doing anything? Maybe because there could be people that are expecting something from it at the tail end of it, you know, and it's not their fault if they got into something like that.
[00:09:37] So then Mark Ahmed chimed in. He talked about. And I'm going to give him partial credit, not full credit. He's still a mark because of the way he approached it. But I'll give him partial credit on. Two weeks ago, I did an upload and I called him out because he said a line in an AMA that said he didn't trust Binance stuff. And I broke down three situations that things Binance stuff said and said, are we suggesting that you don't agree with these clearly obvious things? And I said that this is not what Mark Comet believes. He doesn't believe what he said. He's just in his feelings is basically what I said in this one. He recognized the statement made that he made that was improper. Now he said it was misinterpreted. It wasn't misinterpreted. It was essentially exactly what you said. What really happened is you were in your feelings at the time and you didn't stop. Or to quote Mace, breathe, stretch, shake first. Stop, breathe. Think about what you were trying to say so that you come across credible and not like an idiot. Right? You say what he said here, which is, I don't agree with Binance stuff's opinion of Anthony Turner. Right. That's a very specific disagreement. That is fair game because we, we're all looking at the surface. We can't know if Turner's a scammer. We can't know if Turner's honest. We can't know if Turner's doing stuff. We see some stuff.
[00:11:01] So that's. That is a fair statement to say.
[00:11:05] I don't agree with Binance Stuff's comments or thoughts about Anthony Turner because B stuff has been very critical of Anthony Turner. He's not been wrong about what Anthony Turner has done, which is lie. That's on record. It's proven multiple times. So I still. That's why I say partial credit. I still question how can you disagree with that.
[00:11:24] He maret. He's going off of what he sees and he's created his own belief.
[00:11:32] My belief is that Turner is telling the truth and that he's legitimate. No problem.
[00:11:36] It still doesn't negate what Binance stuff said, which is that Turner lied. All we can do is question why. Turner's lie. That's the power.
[00:11:45] Why. Why is the only power. Without it, you are powerless. To quote the mayor of Engine, we must look at the why and the why is clear.
[00:11:54] As I said, the only logical answer is that Turner's not in charge. A we know that. That's on record. He's admitted it.
[00:12:02] Two, I said what if somebody's got their finger on Turner's balls, right? We don't know if it's that or it's Turner himself being complicit. Like he might be inside. We don't think he is, but he might be. Some people think he is.
[00:12:17] All I'm saying, folks, all this is is Markament does not disagree with Binance. He doesn't disagree with anything Binance stuff said. What's happening is that Mark Comet has his own opinion about turning Turner formed from his conversation with Turner.
[00:12:33] That gives him confidence that Turner is trying to make things right.
[00:12:38] But I'm telling you, Mark Comet does not disagree with Binance stuff. He doesn't disagree with anything. By this stuff said, he's still. That's why I say it's not misinterpretation. He's still in the feelings because he only cares about what Turner's trying to do. Nobody's questioned what appears to be effort finance stuff's point is the man's lied multiple times. But that's fact. It's. It's provable fact. He's putting up evidence. He has lied. That's all. Okay? Kilos is likely overseeing it. That's. We know this. We all. Reed himself has said it.
[00:13:13] So all I'm saying is that it's all about messaging. There's nothing. There's nothing. Not a thing thing that Mark Comet disagrees of what Binance stuff has said. It's not that. That's not what he's saying. He does not disagree with Binance stuff. He does not. Because nothing Binance stuff has said is factually inaccurate. Right? This is simple. What's happening is Binance Markhamed rather has confidence and faith in Turner born from his conversations with turn Turner and is willing to give Turner a chance.
[00:13:49] That's different than saying you disagree with a factual statement.
[00:13:54] This is not about whether it's true or not.
[00:13:58] That's never been what it's about. It's not about whether. That's why I came at him about the Reddit post. That's why I came about him about the email. He doesn't. He's Ms.
[00:14:07] He's conflating two different concepts.
[00:14:11] The. The concept of whether you agree with something or not is different than how you respond to those events. He does not cannot disagree with facts. You can't. They're facts. They are factually accurate. This is what happened. What's happening is his interpretation of events. He chose and is choosing to believe and go a different way for his own reasons. That's fine.
[00:14:38] His response to Binance stuff should simply be, you think that Turner is a scammer. I don't believe he's a scammer. We can agree to disagree. Okay, why don't you believe he's a scammer? He's lied. This is Binance stuff. Why don't you believe he's a scanner? He's lied. I've talked to Turner directly. He's given me confidence. He's trying. That still doesn't assert that he's not a scammer. Then Mark Comet, if he was not a Mark, would say, you're right, I don't know that he's not a scammer. I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. That's it.
[00:15:09] Now we understand where people stand. It is. You're going on faith. You're looking the dude in the eye and you're going on faith. I would remind people that's exactly what happened with Manny the Rug puller, AKA Manny the Hitman, on Saitama Slash side of chain.
[00:15:25] When he formed side of chain, people put faith in him because Russ the cult leader, was out.
[00:15:33] So then they took him on face that he was trying to legitimize the project, only to find out he was just as much a scammer as the rest of them. That's why I keep saying we need to clarify whether what we're talking about is truly that you disagree or that you simply have your own faith, however faulty.
[00:15:52] Why does it matter? You're asking, what does this matter?
[00:15:56] It matters because if you don't clarify that it's really about your own internal faith, that means you're shirking responsibility. You're ducking the smoke. If you own it and say, I'm putting my faith in this person, it's not that I disagree with you. You're right, he's lied. Yes, there's a chance he's a scammer. Yes, there's a chance. This is all smoke and you acknowledge that. He comes to me and says what you said. I understand. The Reddit people, they were pissed off. Yes, there's this smoky stuff. You're correct.
[00:16:25] I'm choosing to have faith in Turner. I'm choosing to believe Turner. When you do that, if Turner turns out to be a scammer, then it compels you to come back and say, shit, I got this wrong. My blind faith. I should have listened to you. I didn't listen to you. He doesn't want to do that. He doesn't want to own if he gets it wrong by saying he disagrees with anything that's fact.
[00:16:52] He's saying he doesn't want to be proven wrong. He doesn't want to be called upon the lamb. He doesn't want to be accountable for what is basically a mistake.
[00:17:02] It's psychological, and it's easy. It's easy.
[00:17:06] I simply like people who are willing to own when they make a decision on their own, contrary to the facts in their face.
[00:17:15] I say, and how I describe it is, you're a gambler. You're rolling the dice, hoping that it works out. I celebrate people who admit that they're gamblers. I don't celebrate people who attack other people who are spitting facts. To quote the kids, he's spitting facts. The guys spit facts. You don't disagree with anything he said. I'm telling you, you. I've watched.
[00:17:38] You don't disagree with anything he said. Not. Not a damn thing. Do you disagree? Because what he said is all fact and all on record and all proven when he shares an opinion about something, which is okay. Turner, by his own words, said he didn't create that.
[00:17:59] Then in a different message, he said he did create it.
[00:18:02] We have a contradiction. Either you did or you didn't. We know he didn't because when asked the question, who hired you? Turner said he couldn't answer it. Why wouldn't he say, nobody hired me. I started it? Because we know he lied. Right? You can say, well, he told me in private what the truth was, fine, but then we can't count on you either, because now you're hiding on behalf of him. You're not sharing the information to allay the community's concerns. How then can you represent the community?
[00:18:32] We got to unpack that, man. What you say will come back at you. And it's simple. There's nothing. There's nothing difficult about any of this.
[00:18:44] The other part of this, which is the quicker one, and it's quick, because the person who shared it did not respond as I was hoping that they would, because I don't want to present it as, this is not fact. This is. I see it, but I don't have facts behind it. So I'm going to share what I think it means.
[00:19:01] And this is opinion and interpretation based on pattern. That's all it is.
[00:19:06] I got an anonymous reach out. The anonymous reach out shared wallet addresses. The wallet addresses are on the Tron or. Yeah, Tron network and allegedly one of them is Liza Bendenberg's address. I don't know that it is.
[00:19:23] I don't know that there's any validity react because like I said, the person didn't respond to cl. Clarify some of that stuff. Now let's say that it is. Let's take it on face that this is Liza Vandenberg's wallet. If we look at Liza's role, it is basically hr.
[00:19:36] HR has a function which is payroll.
[00:19:39] So what I would expect it based on what I know of how organizational structures work in something like the script building. What I would expect to happen is that there would need to be a central fund source. The central fund would need to allocate money to hr. It's budget, right? You allocate money to hr. HR has to pay salaries.
[00:20:03] They all. They also may have to do expenses.
[00:20:06] You either can do that on chain.
[00:20:09] So in this case, let's say it's Tron because blockchain doesn't block, that doesn't exist yet. Or you do it in regular fiat. Let's assume, and this is assumptive. Let's assume. Let's assume that they chose to do it on chain. I don't know why they would pick the Tron network. That I don't know.
[00:20:26] I don't know.
[00:20:27] But let's assume that this is Liza's wallet. Let's assume that what it's for and the transactions I see are payroll.
[00:20:35] Let's assume that the distributions, because the distributions are pretty consistent, the amounts are pretty consistent and that caused possibly some concerns as presented.
[00:20:44] Would I consider it a risk? Maybe we don't know enough about the wallets. We don't know if it's even hers. We don't know why there's a lot of unknowns. Because there's unknowns. This is my beef, this kind of data and why I say that I wish the person had responded this kind of data. It would have been nice if the block DAG team were transparent in these transactions and why they must happen and where they're going and for what purpose.
[00:21:12] Because it would increase confidence from the community to see transparently what's really going on at the lower level. Now the reason I think, and I don't know, but the reason I think they did not is to protect kids or whoever it is that's the source, as I said, of the high level funding because you could then trace it backwards.
[00:21:33] Now it's possible that Zach XPT has some of this knowledge that he did not share with his allegation, which is why I came at him. Because if this is the data that you saw and you can connect the dots back to and you chose not to, that looks bad on you, sir, because people listen to what you say and you've of course scammed a project before. So not sharing the data makes you look scammy where you should have just shared. If this is the data that you were referencing, why don't you share that information? What do you have to hide?
[00:22:04] So what I'm ultimately saying is the transactions I saw in what was shared anonymously that the person is listening. I would love to get the response to my email that I asked because I want to help connect the dots and I'd love to help connect the dots. But what I don't do is improperly state that something may be the truth when I can't prove it. In this case, I can't prove that it's Lizas a B. I can't prove it's block tags. See, I can't prove that it's malicious or that it's surreptitious or that it's any sort of criminal or any. I can't prove anything because it's just wallets with consistent transactions. And I would argue that the amounts are not extreme. Right. And in most cases they seem to correlate to payroll. And if it is Liza's then that would make sense that they are payroll related or that they're compensating somebody. But they seem to be consistent pattern that would seem seem to correlate to payroll. Now the flow is a bit abnormal of what I would expect but again that could very well be like there's some where it goes in and out of exchanges and all sorts of could simply be conversions. Because what I did see is that there's a lot of going to stable.
[00:23:17] So that tells me going to stable that gives me more confidence. It may be payroll related because you wouldn't like if I was going to just straight dump or steal or whatever, you know, I would just dump or steal whatever's the richest asset that I could get access to. And if I'm going to send it to an exchange, I'm not going to send it back on chain to do that to me. But I don't have enough information to draw any stronger inference. So if you do hear this and you got more data, I would love to hear more information. Especially you know the one question that I asked because that would help connect the dots and I'm happy to do the trace within what I. What time that's available. I have to do some ancestry stuff for somebody, but other than that I'm available to help trace the stuff down. And just to clarify, because I did have somebody ask the question about involvement. What is my involvement? My involvement is. I got it. I want an X30 minor so I can test the. That's because it. Let's say that it is a legitimate something. Okay, I'll mine some coins and be cool. Let's say it's not a legit something, okay. I could probably repurpose the hardware for something cool. Like I, I saw no negative, right? It's just, it's throw away money. I didn't care. So I want to see and I'm just waiting on a fucking miner knowing I'm not going to get it till February. It's like, okay, well then I'll just go off and do my own thing, which is what I've been doing, which is outside of crypto because I have my own job. I don't do this for a living. It's a side gig for me me. That's why I don't do like some of the other ones. They're just like rushing to do uploads and I don't. If there's something tangible, I do an upload about it. There's not. I go on my own business and right now, this weekend, power, power is the core focus. I've got power and reliability of power. That's been the core. And I've not looked at any of this stuff. And then I just happen to see this that was streamed a couple days ago that I hadn't noticed because I wasn't paying attention because I don't live online and figured, okay, this is a good time for me to put this out as a two part and just say, okay, here's what this is, here's what this is and just kind of be done with it.
[00:25:20] At the end of the day, all I've said and all I'm saying. So this is where opinions come in and this is why you have to delineate opinion versus fact. This is my opinion and I'm going to state it as my opinion with strong confidence that I'm right.
[00:25:35] My opinion is that Anthony Turner is not in charge.
[00:25:39] Strengthened by him saying that he was not.
[00:25:42] But the reason I put it as an opinion is because I don't think it's that he's not in charge by choice. I don't think it's that he's not in charge post loi. I still think he's not in charge of hardly anything. I still think he's following like, it's a difference. In charge means in charge. It doesn't just mean, well, there's an intent to put me in charge. It's in charge now and in charge of everything.
[00:26:07] Because your title is CEO. I'm saying I don't think he's in charge of any thing, number one. Number two, Nick Vander Idiot has not been seen since.
[00:26:20] Why we saw a video, the keynote. People think it's AI. I didn't say it's AI. I said it looks kind of, like, weird, because it seems kind of weird with the shaving and everything.
[00:26:33] Other people said they thought it's AI. Don't attack me. They're thinking it's AI. I don't have to say it. They're thinking it's AI.
[00:26:41] Point is, he's not been seen since he's not been on any of the AMAs. I've not seen any activity from him. It could be that he's just off in the wings.
[00:26:49] This AMA here with. With Reed. They said that apparently there. There's going to be a. A team with Liza to kind of take over the marketing. I don't know what that means. I don't know if it's, you know, I know data.
[00:27:02] But if they're in charge of marketing, then what does that mean for Nick Vander Idiot? Because he's chief marketing officer, right? Do they report to him? Are they replacing him? This is why I put out the rumor that he was fired. I don't know if it's true or not. I have no idea. But I have to do the coverage because we have to detail these things and document these things over time. 3.
[00:27:22] Reid said that, and I know his great Google video got restored. I saw that. And I think that's because he contacted directly and they reversed it. I don't think the copyright strike was. I don't think the counter did it. I think the block X did it. I don't know that for sure. And he said in this one that apparently a lot of these other things like Facebook and other things are being restored. I can tell you that the one where I did coverage of that great Kudal Kishloos, that one has not been and they've not reached out.
[00:27:51] I got the lawyer on it but they've not tried to work to restore that. So they're not proactively doing it. They might be okay, contact and they'll do it. Well, that's the message that should be put out. The reason they don't put it out is because it would connect BlockX to digitals and by proxy block Dag. And they don't want to connect the dots to prove and confirm. That's why I say information is the finest form of currency. They don't want to communicate to the community to say if there's been an improper takedown, contact us here and we'll take care of it. Because if you do that, it's just going to like that would give me the last bit of evidence that I would need to 100% say who's involved in what. That's why I wasn't worried about it and that's why I put the lawyer on it and just said I'm not even going to worry about this contact business. I want them to self to put out themselves and say we did this. If you want, if you had that situation, contact us here. That could be a block Dag email. If it's a block Dag email.
[00:28:54] But yet the notification, the takedown is submitted by block X. What does that mean? That means block Dag has dictate over block X. That means and we know block X is associated with good on Kishos now you got a straight line between A to C and that's what I want from them. That's why I keep putting this is why I put the coverage out that I do. This is why I say come at me because I'm trying to get information.
[00:29:22] I want information from them because that's how I serve you community is I get the information that connects the dots that Reid has already connected in his mind. He's already connected the dots in his mind despite Turner saying it's quote conjecture. Reid's already connected the dots in his mind. Now maybe he knows specifically that it's all I can say is my one has not been restored.
[00:29:47] If the other ones Reid has were restored and it was because he proactively contacted them. Cool. He's got, he's, he's drawn the line, he's got the connection. Now I want ideally that they, whoever they is, block X Izlos, block Dag, Turner, I don't care. I want them put up a nice little web portal that says if your shit was taken down, paste the link here, and we'll fix it.
[00:30:14] And then we see, because, A, it's good faith, B, we connect the dots and we prove finally, that there was a connection there. They won't do it because they would create the connection, and they don't want to put the connection because they're too deep in it.
[00:30:30] But that's what I've been wanting, that's what I've been fighting for on your behalf, is the information to connect the dots.
[00:30:38] Crypto mother, father, and idiot on YouTube. This is my close.
[00:30:43] Apparently, he got a takedown, and then he put up another video talking about the takedown. I think that got taken down. I'm pretty sure it did.
[00:30:51] And now, of course, I'm Leister Crypto Talk fm. So I know how to get behind the takedown stuff. So I was able to get access to the video.
[00:30:59] The second one, he said in there, essentially, and I paraphrase, you know, I worked too hard on my channel, so I can't have this happen. So there's not going to be any more Black dad coverage. So he.
[00:31:13] He took a knee to Kijiros. He bowed down to Kijiros. He knew. He knew Kijiros was his daddy, and he bowed down because he was afraid, because he's a coward. And it's cool because I called him crypto mother, father, an idiot, not because he's not a smart guy.
[00:31:33] That's not why I called him that. If you missed that one as a while ago.
[00:31:36] I came at him because all he does is just read shit.
[00:31:41] No pun intended. He reads shit on the screen and then just tosses shit out of his head. There's no fundamentals to anything that he does. So, for example, on the block deck site, he pulls up the block deck site, he's talking about, well, here's the tokenomics. And it's got that, ooh, that's a lot of tokens over there. I wonder if they're being stolen or what. He just says shit like, there's nothing. Like, what the hell are you doing? And then he's like, oh, well, this looks like this person. I don't even know if that's a real person over here, despite them being on video. That's. That's why I called him crypto mother, father, an idiot. Because he.
[00:32:19] And has that many followers, paid for. That many damn followers. And he has no valid content whatsoever. He's a goddamn moron.
[00:32:29] He's a moron.
[00:32:31] And seeing him take a knee to Giggles, I couldn't have asked for a better present on a very frosty early December. I really. I really. I absorbed that. It was great.
[00:32:47] It enticed me to just celebrate and say the world is a decent place. Sometimes when we see morons get exposed like that with their pants down and Vaseline off the side to this guy that has no. He has no problems wearing makeup and tight ass braids on his hair. So Crypto. Mother, father, and idiot. She took a knee. He bowed to the master. Okay. Reed did not. Reed fought. I fought. Finance stuff. Fighting Scam alert. Fought.
[00:33:17] Some of us fight.
[00:33:19] Some of us are cowards.
[00:33:21] Some of us are mercs.
[00:33:23] I told you. We got the factions and you got to choose the side. You got to choose where you're going to be and who you're going to be represented with and identify at the end of it all.
[00:33:37] Identify, observe.
[00:33:39] Keep an eye out. Because you never know with this kind of shit.
[00:33:45] We might very well be looking at another Saitama, but one done by slightly smarter people.
![Leicester On Recent #BlockDAG Non-Updates And TheCryptoFather Bending The Knee (OOC) [COLORFUL LANGUAGE]](https://episodes.castos.com/6546338b457f18-29496768/images/2288415/c1a-r5pr3-pkv3jqw0h0n-yzsee7.jpg)
