PayPal Crypto service on high demand

PayPal CEO, Dan Schulman says its clients are signing up for its crypto services at an alarming rate.

high demand

PayPal CEO, Dan Schulman says its clients are signing up 

Payments giant, PayPal, says it’s receiving high support for its Crypto service more than it anticipated in its Q3 2020 Earnings Conference Call on Youtube.

What you should know: A few weeks ago, Nairametrics disclosed PayPal’s plan to provide its users the opportunity to buy, hold, and sell cryptos directly from their PayPal account by early next year.

READ: Why Bitcoin might go for $3 million in 2025

It hinted at a strategy to significantly boost its crypto’s utility capability by making it readily available as a funding source for purchases by its 26 million clients globally.

What they are saying: PayPal CEO, Dan Schulman, disclosed its clients are signing up to be the first to use the company’s crypto services at an alarming rate. PayPal has started to permit 10% of its customer base to buy, sell, and hold Bitcoin, Ethereum, Bitcoin Cash, and Litecoin.

READ: BTC bounty: 69,000 Bitcoins worth $700 million waiting for you

Schulman said, “We’re going to take up our $10,000 limit per day to $15,000 per day, based on the demand that we’re seeing and we’ll roll out to 100% in the U.S. in the next two to three weeks. We’re beginning to already see some halo effects that go on with that.

“But what I’m really excited about is what we’re going to introduce next year, which is, I think, going to dramatically increase the utility of cryptocurrencies, by enabling somebody who holds a cryptocurrency in a PayPal account to instantaneously transfer that crypto into fiat currency at a step rate. So, volatility is taken out of the equation, with no incremental fees charged for them to do that transaction from crypto into fiat

READ: 200 Bitcoins worth $2.4 million to be won as prize money

“Then immediately settle in fiat with all $28 million of our merchants at our current take rates and so you have no additional integration needed at any of our merchants. This is just an elegant way of using cryptocurrencies as a funding mechanism.”

Schulman gave key insights on why the global payment company was going crypto.

READ: 6 features to look out for in a Cryptocurrency

“The shift to digital forms of currencies is inevitable, bringing with it clear advantages in terms of financial inclusion and access, efficiency, speed, and the resilience of the payments system and the ability for governments to disburse funds to citizens quickly,” he adde

Bitcoin on steroids, demand high amid COVID-19

Recent data reveals Bitcoin $BTC Miner Revenue (1d MA) just reached a 5-month high of $716,165.65.

Bitcoin is on a blue flame scenario, as investors increase their buying pressure at an alarming rate, amid odds anticipating for more quantitive easing if Joe Biden gets inaugurated in January.

What you should know

• Bitcoin, at the time this report was drafted, traded at $14,497.87 with a daily trading volume of $26,377,618,150.
• BTC price is up 6.3% in the last 24 hours. It has a circulating supply of 19 Million coins and a max supply of 21 Million coins.

Tyler Winklevoss the Co-founder of Gemini exchange, elaborated on the bullish sign in the flagship crypto market, on the bias that Bitcoin breached $14,000 again and continues to show that it is the only clear winner.

More bullish signs

Meanwhile, Bitcoin miners are presently having more funds at their bank account on data that recently revealed Bitcoin $BTC Miner Revenue (1d MA) just reached a 5-month high of $716,165.65.

The previous 5-month high of $709,664.74 was observed on 04 November 2020. That said,

• It is important to observe that long-time Bitcoin holders are increasingly holding BTC for longer periods, leading to some scarcity; thereby, pushing prices as retail traders rush to own a stake in the most demanded crypto amid the COVID-19 era.
• HODLing activity by global investors has surged since March, when the price of BTC briefly dropped below $4,o00. Since then, investors have been steadil

Vitae: Crypto for social rewards up 65% W/W

VITAE price is up 0.4% in the last 24 hours. It has a circulating supply of 21 million coins and a max supply of 100 million coins

As global investors increase their buying pressure on crypto assets, distinct crypto has been gaining traction at an astronomical rate. Vitae, the crypto known for social rewards is up 65% in the past 7 days, according to data seen from Coingecko.

At the time of drafting this report, Vitae price traded at $6.54 with a daily trading volume of $1,473,269.

VITAE price is up 0.4% in the last 24 hours. It has a circulating supply of 21 million coins and a max supply of 100 Million coins.

What you should know

Created with the objective to change the world, by facilitating a social rewards network for financial prosperity via POS (Proof Of Stake), Master Node, and Super Node.

• The crypto asset tracks the trends of the social media world, while creating its own type of social media structure.
• It should also be noted that this fast-growing crypto had been on the top radar for some weeks, as it’s been leading the top gainers w/w periodical

Launched in 2018 by a team based in Switzerland, Vitae Token is a PivX fork. It utilizes a network of Masternodes/Supernodes for decentralized governance and increased transaction privacy.

• Its motto is growing global prosperity.
• The crypto shares most of its revenue with its 

Why Bitcoin might go for $3 million in 2025

People have no idea what it will look like when large banks and countries start holding bitcoin in their treasu

Published

November 5, 2020

As the world’s flagship crypto – Bitcoin, continues to record astronomical growth, seen at unprecedented levels, some top fund managers anticipate this might just be the beginning.

Jason Williams, Co-Founder and Partner at Morgan Creek Digital, a digital asset-focused investment fund, recently spoke on why he believed it was just a matter of time, that the world’s most known crypto would hit at least the million-dollar status.“Bitcoin could hit 1–3M dollars in the next 5 years. People have no idea what it will look like when large banks and countries start holding bitcoin in their treasury.“To this, he also added that Bitcoin’s digital scarcity is a key feature in its continued growth across institutional contexts. If you’ve read any of our previous articles on Bitcoin’s value, then you know that we, at NBX, believe that digital scarcity is the crux of Bitcoin’s value, alongside its efficiency as a diversifier, among other factors.“In other words, to pin down Bitcoin’s complete value proposition is a complex undertaking, which is why it’s important to nail down aspects of it that we haven’t mentioned yet.”

What it means

A major factor helping the hedge fund’s manager bias, is that the flagship crypto is a way out into the future. It is scarce and can never be forged by the International Monetary Fund or any single government, meaning it will always be scarce in principle.

Robert Breedlove, the CEO of Parallax digitals, also spoke via Youtube on Bitcoin’s safe-haven asset properties.“Bitcoin is the first social institution in human history with laws that cannot be corrupted. There will never be more than 21 million Bitcoin, only the owner of a private key can move their Bitcoin, and (when properly kept) Bitcoin cannot be forcibly confiscated. Bitcoin is the only money maximally resistant to misappropriation in a world increasingly under siege by overreaching governments.

#Endsars Protesters is fela long dreams fulfiled

 #endsarz protest is something Nigerian have never witness in ages but also is a point which one of Nigerian late legend fela kuti sang about in his number songs 

This was the same people he quote There are ruling us without messy and with force looting all our treasures . 

Marian Sanda sentences to dead

Iranian lawmaker places $3m bounty on Donald Trump

An Iranian lawmaker has offered a $3 million reward to anyone who assassinates President Trump adding that the Islamic republic could avoid threats if it had nuclear weapons, according to a report.

“On behalf of the people of Kerman province, we will pay a $3 million reward in cash to whoever kills Trump,” Ahmad Hamzeh told the 290-seat parliament, according to Reuters, which cited the state-run ISNA news outlet.
He did not say if his idea of putting a price on the president’s head had any official backing from Iran’s clerical rulers.
Tensions have steadily ramped up since Trump pulled Washington out of Tehran’s nuclear agreement with world powers in 2018 and reimposed sanctions on the country. The standoff sparked tit-for-tat military strikes this month.
The city of Kerman is the hometown of revered military commander Qassem Soleimani, whose killing in a drone strike ordered by Trump on Jan. 3 in Baghdad prompted Iran to launch missiles at US targets in Iraq.

“If we had nuclear weapons today, we would be protected from threats … We should put the production of long-range missiles capable of carrying unconventional warheads on our agenda. This is our natural right,” Hamzeh was quoted as saying.
Tehran insists it has never sought nuclear weapons and never will, saying its nuclear work is for research purposes and to master the process to generate electricity.
The 2015 nuclear accord was designed to increase the time Iran would need to obtain enough fissile material for a nuclear bomb if it wanted one from about two or three months.
Under the deal, Iran received sanctions relief in return for curbing its nuclear activities. But in response to Washington’s withdrawal from the pact and pressure from its sanctions, Iran has gradually rolled back its commitments to the deal.
Tehran recently announced it was scrapping all limits on its uranium enrichment work, potentially shortening the so-called “breakout time” needed to build a nuke.
After its latest move to step away from compliance with the nuclear accord, Britain, France, and Germany triggered a dispute mechanism in the pact, starting a diplomatic process that could lead to reimposing UN sanctions. (New York Post)

Hillary Clinton: Bernie Sanders Is Just a Career Politician and ‘Nobody Likes Him’

The 2016 candidate tore into Sanders, saying he’s wildly unpopular in Congress and accusing him of using Trumpian tactics.

 

Hillary Clinton has taken herself off the sidelines of the race for the Democratic presidential nomination with a brutal condemnation of Sen. Bernie Sanders, his campaign team, and his supporters.
In an interview with The Hollywood Reporter to promote the upcoming Hulu documentary, Hillary, Clinton laid into her 2016 Democratic primary rival who she has previously accused of contributing to her eventual election defeat to Donald Trump. Clinton said Sanders and his team have relentlessly attacked Democratic women, and she threw her support behind Sen. Elizabeth Warren, who has faced abuse for claiming Sanders told her during a private meeting that a woman couldn’t win the election.
Clinton’s stinging attack came the day after Sanders was forced to apologize to former Vice President Joe Biden because his campaign had promoted an overzealous op-ed by one of his surrogates accusing Biden of having a “big corruption problem.”
The Hollywood Reporter was interviewing Clinton about the upcoming Hulu documentary and read her a quote from one of the scenes: “[Sanders] was in Congress for years. He had one senator support him. Nobody likes him, nobody wants to work with him, he got nothing done. He was a career politician. It’s all just baloney and I feel so bad that people got sucked into it.”
Asked if that assessment still stood, Clinton said yes and then went further. She refused to say whether she would endorse him if her party chose him as its 2020 candidate, but made it clear that she hoped that wouldn’t happen.
Clinton and Sanders fell out in a big way during the 2016 campaign but she was not expected to intervene so powerfully in the current race. In her 2017 book, What Happened, Clinton argued that Sanders’ attacks against her during the primary contributed to Trump’s shock victory. She wrote that Sanders resorted to “innuendo and impugning my character” because he was unable to criticize her effectively on policy, which she believes caused her “lasting damage” when it came to November 2016.
Clinton has now told the Hollywood Reporter that the entire Sanders 2020 operation is a problem.
“It’s not only him, it’s the culture around him,” she said. “It’s his leadership team. It’s his prominent supporters. It’s his online Bernie Bros and their relentless attacks on lots of his competitors, particularly the women. And I really hope people are paying attention to that because it should be worrisome that he has permitted this culture—not only permitted, [he] seems to really be very much supporting it.”
Clinton went on to accuse Sanders of giving his supporters tacit approval to go after female nominees such as Warren and Sen. Kamala Harris by giving them “a wink.” She appeared to discourage people from voting for Sanders on that basis, saying: “I think that that’s a pattern that people should take into account when they make their decisions.”
Clinton became particularly heated when asked about Warren’s claim that Sanders told her a woman couldn’t win the presidency.
Sanders denied that he had said it during last week’s televised debate and Warren initially tried to diffuse the situation, saying, “Bernie is my friend, and I’m not here to try to fight with Bernie.”
Warren’s irritation boiled over at the end of the debate, however, and she confronted Sanders on stage, thinking the cameras were no longer rolling. CNN eventually released a recording that showed her facing him down over the denial. “I think you called me a liar on national TV,” she said.
Clinton obviously shared Warren’s frustration. She said it was nonsense to say a woman couldn’t win since she won the primaries in 2016 and got around three million more votes than Trump later that year. Then she turned on Sanders once again, claiming his campaign had “gone after Elizabeth [Warren] with a very personal attack on her” after her disclosure.
“If it were a one-off, you might say, ‘OK, fine,’” said Clinton. “But he said I was unqualified. I had a lot more experience than he did, and got a lot more done than he had, but that was his attack on me. I just think people need to pay attention because we want, hopefully, to elect a president who’s going to try to bring us together, and not either turn a blind eye, or actually reward the kind of insulting, attacking, demeaning, degrading behavior that we’ve seen from this current administration.”
Elsewhere in the interview, Clinton said she had talked to Warren, Sen. Amy Klobuchar, and “practically everybody” who either has run for the Democratic nomination or is still running. When asked if Sanders was excluded from that, she confirmed, by a nod of the head, that he wasn’t.
Asked what advice she’s given, Clinton said she told the female candidates: “You can run the best campaign, but you’re going to have to be even better than your best campaign to overcome some of the unfairness that will be directed at you as a woman.”
Sanders has declined to comment.

How Trump Twisted Iran Intel to Manufacture the ‘Four Embassies’ Threat

 

There were definitely questions [at the time, internally] about whether he had just made it up on the spot,” recalled one White House official.
Asawin Suebsaeng  > White House Reporter
Erin Banco > National Security Reporter
When President Donald Trump publicly claimed earlier this month that he had seen intel showing Iran’s now-deceased top military leader Qassem Soleimani was plotting attacks on “four [American] embassies,” senior officials in Trump’s national security apparatus shook their heads. They weren’t sure exactly why the president leaned on that particular talking point, and scrambled in the following days to formulate answers to a barrage of questions from the media on exactly what the president had meant. Other officials wondered aloud whether the president had misrepresented the intelligence.
“There were definitely questions [at the time, internally] about whether he had just made it up on the spot,” recalled one White House official.
It turns out Trump—technically—didn’t get his eyebrow-raising claim out of nowhere, The Daily Beast has learned. According to three sources familiar with the matter, the president had simply seized on a small part of what he’d heard in private briefings, exaggerated that aspect of the intelligence, then began sharing the inflated intel to the American public during his post-Soleimani victory lap.
In doing so, President Trump generated yet more confusion and discord among the national security brass that had already struggled to sell the American people on its case for the strike that just brought Iran and the United States to the precipice of all-out warfare. For weeks the Trump administration had struggled to get on message in talking about why the U.S. decided to strike Soleimani and what it would do in the future to manage any diplomacy with Tehran. Trump’s embassy claim didn’t help, officials said.

“There were definitely questions about whether Trump had just made it up on the spot.”

— White House official

The White House did not comment on the record for this story.
Shortly before he began announcing to the media and rally-goers that the Iranian general was planning assaults on multiple U.S. embassies, the president received briefings at the White House from both national security officials and communications staffers. The purpose of some of these meetings were to prepare Trump on how best to talk to the press regarding his administration’s justifications for killing Soleimani.
The president received a briefing shortly before he entered the Roosevelt Room Jan. 9 and said Iran was “looking to blow up our embassy.”
According to two people familiar with this briefing, Trump was told the pre-strike intelligence showed that Iran could lash out against American assets in the region. The president was again told this in a subsequent briefing that day, one of these sources added. However, embassies were a part of a long list of American outposts and bases potentially under threat from Iran but sources familiar with those internal briefings do not remember the number four ever being specified, and they certainly do not recall any imminent danger to those embassies.
When administration officials briefed Trump, they mentioned possible targets for Iranian assaults; they were not discussing intel on what anyone in the regime was actively plotting against U.S. interests, the sources noted.
However, the moment he heard the word “embassies,” Trump immediately chimed in, interrupting the meeting to grill his briefers on that issue, according to one U.S. official. From there, he began to treat this possible threat as a near-certain danger. Trump received another intelligence briefing shortly before his interview with Fox’s Laura Ingraham Jan. 10 where he repeated the claim that Iran probably would have attacked four embassies.
When the president started publicly trotting out his claims of “four embassies,” national security aides were dumbfounded. The Washington Post reported earlier this month that Trump’s “four embassies” talking point clashed with intelligence assessments from Trump’s own officials. CNN also reported that security officials at the State Department weren’t even notified of an imminent danger to any specific set of four American embassies.

“The president seized on a small part of what he’d heard in private briefings, exaggerated that aspect of the intelligence, then began sharing the inflated intel during his post-Soleimani victory lap.”

Secretary of Defense Mark Esper himself admitted during an interview on the CBS Sunday show Face the Nation that while “the president said that he believed that it probably could have been attacks against additional embassies,” Esper personally “didn’t see [a specific piece of evidence] with regard to four embassies.”