BlackRock and friends may soon control your digital wallet



America is on the edge of a financial cliff, and Washington’s so-called “solution” is yet another clever ploy that could further centralize power and lead to a reduction in freedom.

The latest scheme is a bipartisan bill dubbed the Genius Act. The U.S. Senate passed the bill on Tuesday by a vote of 68-30. The bill now moves on to the House, where its prospects are less clear.

It’s time for the right to sound the alarm and reject the Genius Act — at least until it offers protections for individual liberty.

Supporters of the law claim it will modernize digital finance by issuing new regulations for stablecoins, shoring up assets currently used by millions of people worldwide.

But the legislation comes with serious threats to liberty as well. It could ultimately become a backdoor way to create a digital dollar, one that offers minimal privacy protections and is easily controlled by massive institutions unaccountable to voters.

What is the Genius Act?

Officially named the “Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins Act,” the Genius Act aims to bring order and credibility to the booming stablecoin market.

Stablecoins are cryptocurrencies tied to supposedly “stable” assets like the U.S. dollar. USD Coin and Tether — two of the most widely used — circulate more than $200 billion combined.

The bill creates a regulatory framework for stablecoin issuers, allowing them to operate under either state or federal supervision. Lawmakers believe this approach will boost credibility with consumers and financial institutions.

The legislation also forces issuers to disclose their reserve assets, submit to public audits, and comply with the Bank Secrecy Act. That law requires financial entities to implement know-your-customer protocols and anti-money-laundering measures — rules that many stablecoin issuers currently avoid.

Most importantly, the Genius Act would force issuers to back their coins with liquid assets, such as U.S. dollars and Treasury securities. For example, for every USD Coin distributed, the issuer would need to maintain $1 in reserves or Treasury bills of equivalent value, ensuring that users can always exchange their stablecoins for dollars.

The Genius Act has drawn broad bipartisan support on Capitol Hill. Lawmakers from both parties praise its regulatory ambitions. But behind the applause lie serious risks.

Programmable money vs. financial freedom

The bill lays the foundation for a programmable digital currency system — one that lacks basic protections for privacy and liberty.

By granting stablecoins federal recognition and placing them under strict oversight and reserve rules, the Genius Act effectively turns them into government-blessed digital dollars, even if the federal government doesn’t issue them directly.

That might sound like progress — if the bill actually protected consumers. But it doesn’t.

The legislation includes no safeguards to prevent stablecoin issuers from linking usage to social credit systems, such as ESG scores, or restricting legal but politically disfavored transactions. These programmable currencies could easily reflect the ideological preferences of their creators.

RELATED: A brutal wake-up call from America’s most powerful banker

Photo by Al Drago/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Want to donate to a political cause that a stablecoin company opposes? Expect a digital roadblock. Want to buy red meat, a gas-powered car, or anything else that fails to meet an ESG benchmark? Your money might simply stop working.

That’s not science fiction. That’s the likely outcome if Congress fails to add robust consumer protections to the Genius Act.

A forced hand

No one needs to use stablecoins — at least not yet. The Genius Act doesn’t eliminate traditional dollars. For now, consumers still have alternatives. But that could change quickly.

Stablecoins regulated by the U.S. government offer clear advantages over traditional currency. They move instantly, cost little or nothing to send, and operate around the clock. Because they’re digital, they require no physical infrastructure to create or distribute.

In nearly every respect, government-regulated stablecoins outperform paper money. Once the U.S. government legitimizes them and guarantees their safety, adoption will surge.

As usage grows, demand for traditional dollars could shrink. The companies issuing stablecoins would gain enormous control over economic life. Financial institutions could even begin phasing out physical currency, leaving those who resist digital money with no practical alternative.

That’s why Congress must include strong protections for individual liberty in any bill that accelerates stablecoin adoption. Without those safeguards, Americans may one day wake up to find their economic freedom coded out of existence.

A boon for Treasurys

One of the primary reasons so many in Washington support the Genius Act is that it would increase demand for Treasury bills, which helps the federal government finance its massive debt.

The Genius Act would require stablecoin issuers to back their currencies with cash or U.S. Treasurys. Of the two options, Treasury bills often make more sense for the companies issuing stablecoins. Why? Because Treasury bills pay interest.

Washington is drowning in red ink. With over $36 trillion in national debt and counting, the government desperately needs someone to keep buying its IOUs. Stablecoins could offer a trillion-dollar solution. By 2028, the Treasury Department estimates that stablecoin issuers could hold up to $1 trillion in Treasurys, so long as legislation like the Genius Act becomes law.

The Genius Act isn’t primarily about innovation. It’s about bailing out a bankrupt government.

Who’s pulling the strings?

Even more troubling is who stands to benefit. Major players behind these stablecoins include BlackRock, Fidelity, and other financial giants with deep ties to the globalist ESG agenda and organizations like the World Economic Forum. These aren’t neutral actors. They are ideological enforcers with an appetite for control.

Are these the people we want managing the digital currency of the future?

Are these the institutions we trust to safeguard our freedoms?

It’s time for the right to sound the alarm and reject the Genius Act — at least until it offers protections for individual liberty. If we do not act now, we may soon find ourselves in a nation where every transaction is tracked, every purchase scrutinized, and every dollar you “own” is merely rented from a system that can revoke your access with the flick of a switch.

‘Take It Down Act’ targets deepfake perverts exploiting teens online



Elliston Berry was 14 years old when a classmate used an AI editing app to turn her social media photo into a deepfake nude. He circulated the fake image on Snapchat. The next day, similar deepfake images of eight more girls spread among classmates.

The victims’ parents filed a Title IX complaint. Authorities charged the student who created the images with a class A misdemeanor. Still, the deepfake nudes stayed online. Berry’s mother appealed to Snapchat for more than eight months to remove the images. Only after U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) personally contacted the company did Snapchat finally take the pictures down.

The Take It Down Act would make it illegal to knowingly publish ‘nonconsensual intimate imagery’ depicting real, identifiable people on social media or other online platforms.

As AI becomes cheaper and more accessible, anyone can create exploitative digital content — and anyone can become a victim. In 2023, one in three deepfake tools allowed users to produce AI-generated pornography. With just one clear photo, anyone could create a 60-second pornographic video in under 25 minutes for free.

The explosion of deepfake pornography should surprise no one. Pornography accounted for 98% of all online deepfake videos in 2023. Women made up 99% of the victims.

Even though AI-generated images are fake, the consequences are real — humiliation, exploitation, and shattered reputations. Without strong laws, explicit deepfakes can haunt victims forever, circulating online, jeopardizing careers, and inflicting lifelong damage.

First lady Melania Trump has made tackling this crisis an early priority — and she’s right. In the digital age, technological advancement must come with stronger protections for kids and families online. AI’s power to innovate also carries a power to destroy. To curb its abuse, the first lady has championed the Take It Down Act, a bipartisan bill sponsored by Cruz and Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.).

The bill would make it illegal to knowingly publish “nonconsensual intimate imagery” depicting real, identifiable people on social media or other online platforms. Crucially, it would also require websites to remove such images within 48 hours of receiving notice from a victim.

The Take It Down Act marks an essential first step in building federal protections for kids online. Pornography already peddles addiction in the guise of pleasure. AI-generated pornography, created without the subject’s knowledge or consent, takes the exploitation even further. Deepfake porn spreads like wildfire. One in eight teenagers ages 13 to 17 know someone who has been victimized by fake nudes.

The bill also holds AI porn creators accountable. Victims would finally gain the legal means to demand removal of deepfake images from social media and pornography sites alike.

Forty-nine states and Washington, D.C., ban the nonconsensual distribution of real intimate images, often called “revenge porn.” As AI technology advanced, 20 states also passed laws targeting the distribution of deepfake pornographic images.

State laws help, but they cannot fully protect Americans in a borderless digital world. AI-generated pornography demands a federal solution. The Take It Down Act would guarantee justice for victims no matter where they live — and force websites to comply with the 48-hour removal rule.

We are grateful that the first lady has fought for this cause and that the Senate has acted. Now the House must follow. With President Trump’s signature, this critical protection for victims of digital exploitation can finally become law.

Congress can’t legislate away unintended consequences



Sometimes, bipartisanship is a great meeting of the minds. Other times, it’s a meeting of minds that don’t understand economics. The latter is the case with recently proposed legislation to cap credit card interest rates, introduced by Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) and her reliably misguided counterpart, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.).

Let’s start with common ground. Most people agree that credit card interest rates, which now average well above 20%, are excessive. No one should pay 20% or 30% interest annually unless facing a true emergency, and even then, that debt should be paid off as quickly as possible.

Policies that sound good in theory often fail in practice, and capping credit card interest rates is one of them.

Pricing serves as a signal, providing consumers with critical information. A high interest rate should send a clear message: Avoid carrying a credit card balance. Paying off the full amount each month prevents the burden of excessive interest charges.

However, in typical fashion, lawmakers who put political appeal over economic literacy ignore the unintended consequences of their policies. Proposing a cap on interest rates disrupts this pricing signal and creates a cascade of negative effects.

The most immediate consequence is reduced access to credit. High credit card interest rates exist largely because lenders assume the risk of defaults, including the possibility that borrowers may discharge their debt through bankruptcy. To compensate for this risk, lenders adjust costs accordingly.

Capping credit card interest rates while maintaining the bankruptcy “out” forces lenders to adjust their underwriting process. As a result, many borrowers — including those with poor credit and even some with decent credit — will lose or be denied access to credit from traditional sources. To compensate for lost revenue, lenders will likely introduce additional fees, making borrowing more expensive in other ways.

Predictably, lawmakers like Luna and Ocasio-Cortez will then complain about financial discrimination against low-income borrowers who suddenly find themselves locked out of the credit system.

Without access to traditional credit, many of these individuals will turn to riskier, more expensive alternatives, such as payday lenders or even black-market sources, further exacerbating the problem policymakers claim to be solving.

Ultimately, Congress cannot legislate away unintended consequences. In fact, Congress is typically a source of unintended consequences.

Some may argue that restricting credit access is beneficial for certain individuals, but denying access doesn’t mean people won’t seek credit elsewhere — often from riskier, more expensive sources.

More importantly, what gives the government the authority to regulate financial responsibility? Should Congress also prevent people from buying cars they can’t afford, placing sports bets, purchasing designer clothes, or enjoying steak dinners?

Financial responsibility cannot be legislated, especially in a country with minimal financial literacy education.

And let’s not forget that Congress itself has accumulated $36.5 trillion in national debt. Hardly a role model for fiscal responsibility.

Policies that sound good in theory often fail in practice, and capping credit card interest rates is one of them. Instead of creating more financial hurdles, Congress should focus on fixing its own fiscal mismanagement and addressing affordability issues. People shouldn’t feel forced to borrow at insane rates just to make ends meet.

As Trump signs COVID relief package in a late-night move, Republicans and Democrats both press for new vote on $2,000 stimulus payments



Both Republicans and Democrats pressed for a new vote on $2,000 stimulus checks after President Donald Trump signed a COVID-19 relief package into law Sunday night.

What are the details?

According to a late-night Newsweek report, lawmakers from both parties impressed the importance of a new — fast — vote to give Americans $2,000 stimulus checks as opposed to $600 checks amid the COVID-19 pandemic.

Last week, Trump blasted the stimulus and spending bill for what he said was a "disgrace" to the American people, according to the outlet.

"I simply want to get our great people $2,000 he tweeted about the bill," he said.

In a statement announcing his signing, he added, "On Monday, the House will vote to increase payments to individuals from $600 to $2,000. Therefore, a family of four would receive $5,200."

Newsweek reported, "Some GOP lawmakers joined Democrats in using the vote for $2,000 stimulus checks on Sunday. Others have already expressed opposition to boosting direct payments, indicating that the party could break with Trump on the record in the coming days."

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) on Twitter praised the president following the announcement, writing, "With President @realDonaldTrump signing the COVID relief funding bill, suffering Americans will get help, the vaccine will be distributed faster, and the government will stay open."

"Congress will vote on additional stimulus checks and repealing Section 230 — all wins for the American people. Well done Mr. President!" he added.

@realDonaldTrump Congress will vote on additional stimulus checks and repealing Section 230 -- all wins for the Ame… https://t.co/FHb4HZPz1b
— Lindsey Graham (@Lindsey Graham)1609118855.0

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) shared a lengthy statement on Twitter Sunday night following the news, writing, "I applaud the President's decision to get billions of dollars of crucial COVID-19 relief out the door and into the hands of American families. I am glad the American people will receive this much-needed assistance as our nation continues battling this pandemic."

You can read McConnell's full statement below.

I applaud the President’s decision to get billions of dollars of crucial COVID-19 relief out the door and into the… https://t.co/FasaBYrsFb
— Leader McConnell (@Leader McConnell)1609118275.0

What else?

The president's move even won accolades from far-left Democrats including Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y).

Ocasio-Cortez applauded the president's move and wrote, "Great, now he can sign @RashidaTlaib and I's amendment to bring the $600 checks to $2K."

Great, now he can sign @RashidaTlaib and I’s amendment to bring the $600 checks to $2k 🤗 https://t.co/foq2dmNUrS
— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez)1609119541.0

Sanders added, "Finally. Now Trump must get Mitch McConnell and his Republican friends in the Senate to pass legislation to provide $2,000 in direct payments to the working class — legislation I introduced with @SenKamalaHarris and @SenMarkey 7 months ago."

Finally. Now, Trump must get Mitch McConnell and his Republican friends in the Senate to pass legislation to provid… https://t.co/jlkwvWOvVc
— Bernie Sanders (@Bernie Sanders)1609121420.0

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) added, "The House will pass a bill to give Americans $2,000 checks. Then I will move to pass it in the Senate. No Democrats will object. Will Senate Republicans?"

The House will pass a bill to give Americans $2,000 checks. Then I will move to pass it in the Senate.No Democrat… https://t.co/8ZG3hDPukY
— Chuck Schumer (@Chuck Schumer)1609120325.0