Peter Schiff Embarrasses Himself Discussing Kim Kardashian, Accuses M. Saylor

This may be Peter Schiff’s weirdest take, and the male’s got a couple of. While discussing Kim Kardashian’s current handle the SEC, the gold bug fired at “the real pumpers”… Michael Saylor? and… CNBC? Did Peter Schiff and his group even do fundamental research study about Kim Kardashian’s case? Or is he playing dumb, assaulting his viewed opponents, and muddying the waters? For Peter Schiff’s sake let’s hope it’s the 2nd alternative, due to the fact that what he composed was downright humiliating. 

Peter Schiff’s specific words were: “The SEC is fining Kim Kardashian $1.2 million for pumping crypto. What about the real pumpers? Saylor had much more to gain pumping crypto than Kim. Or CNBC paid millions for ads by crypto companies, then pumping Bitcoin non-stop while providing industry pumpers with airtime?” Wow. When newbies to the area mix bitcoin and crypto, it’s frequently a sincere error. Peter Schiff, nevertheless, blogs about bitcoin every day of his life. Could he be this out of the loop? Or does he have a prejudice?

What Is Peter Schiff Even Talking About?

First of all, Kim Kardashian did settle with the SEC for $1.2 million. The allegation was particularly about a supposed fraud called EthereumMax. Apparently, she didn’t reveal the payment she got for the promo. According to our protection, Kim K “agreed to pay $1.26 million in penalties, including her promotional payment for EthereumMax. In addition, the socialite agreed to stop promoting “crypto securities” for the coming 3 years and to work together with the SEC’s continuous examination.”

That’s the case in a nutshell. It has absolutely nothing to do with bitcoin or Saylor. And you can be sure that CNBC divulges all of the payments they get for crypto advertisements. So, what is Peter Schiff even speaking about?

BTC cost chart for 04/10/2022 on FX | Source: BTC/USD on

Michael Saylor Fires Back

The MicroStrategy mastermind replied with a fundamental lesson: “Bitcoin is a commodity, not a security. Advocating a commodity is similar to promoting steel, aluminum, concrete, glass, or granite. The BTC network is an open protocol, offering utilitarian benefits similar to roads, rails, radio, telephone, television, internet, or english.” This need to prevail understanding, however it isn’t. A self-proclaimed professional like Peter Schiff needs to understand everything about it, however. It’s actually his task.

Notice that Saylor didn’t discuss gold, Peter Schiff’s support. When a Twitter user pushed him on the resemblances in between him shilling gold and Saylor bitcoin, Schiff reacted: “My recommending gold is not the same as bitcoin owners looking to sell pumping bitcoin.  I don’t sell any gold that I own. I sell retail, then buy wholesale on behalf of customers. Also my advocacy of gold has no effect on its price.” Is he suggesting that Saylor offers his bitcoin and moves the marketplace with his tweets? Because those are 2 lies.

The reality of the matter is that bitcoin is a product and not a security. That’s not a viewpoint. That’s the SEC’s main position on the matter.

Plus, Saylor was not paid by a 3rd party. Bitcoin is really decentralized and doesn’t have a marketing spending plan, much less an owner.

Bitcoin is not crypto. And Peter Schiff need to understand that.

Featured Image: Peter Schiff screenshot from his website | Charts by TradingView

Michael Saylor screenshot

The name acknowledgment that bitcoin gave MicroStrategy can’t be purchased. They “can’t really ignore us,” Saylor stated. Bitcoin has actually been a “benefit on marketing and sales” and a “net positive” for the business. In reality, he certifies it as “a screaming homerun for the shareholders.”

Michael Evans

Professional writer, editor, and producer with over a decade of experience. I'm an experienced editor who has written for a variety of publications, and I specialize in editing non-fiction articles, news, and business blogs.

Related Articles

Back to top button