Business
SEC, Gensler face bipartisan backlash over X account hack on January 18, 2024 at 11:00 am Business News | The Hill
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Chair Gary Gensler is facing bipartisan political backlash after the agency’s social media account was hacked last week and falsely claimed it had approved several highly anticipated bitcoin investment funds.
While the SEC ultimately approved the exchange-traded funds (ETFs) holding bitcoin about 24 hours later, the high-profile blunder for the agency puts Gensler in a tough spot as an already unpopular figure in the cryptocurrency world and among Republican lawmakers.
And some Democrats who have been generally pleased with Gensler are joining calls for investigations.
“Mainly, it was embarrassing for the SEC,” Ian Katz, managing director at research consultancy Capital Alpha Partners, told The Hill.
“It’s given ammunition to Gensler’s enemies and his opponents and people in Congress who don’t like him to begin with,” he added.
The SEC revealed last Tuesday afternoon that its account on X, formerly known as Twitter, had been hacked after it appeared to approve the spot bitcoin ETFs. The agency deleted the post after about 30 minutes and replaced it with a disavowal.
“The @SECGov X account was compromised, and an unauthorized post was posted. The SEC has not approved the listing and trading of spot bitcoin exchange-traded products,” the agency said.
The incident quickly prompted calls from Republican lawmakers for the SEC to provide an explanation for the breach.
“Just like the SEC would demand accountability from a public company if they made such a colossal market-moving mistake, Congress needs answers on what just happened,” Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.), a member of the Senate Banking Committee, said in a post on X. “This is unacceptable.”
Sens. JD Vance (R-Ohio) and Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) sent a letter to Gensler in the aftermath requesting information about the incident, noting the impact of the false announcement on the price of bitcoin.
The price of bitcoin briefly surged on the news, jumping to nearly $48,000, before falling to less than $46,000.
“These developments raise serious concerns regarding the Commission’s internal cybersecurity procedures and are antithetical to the Commission’s tripart mission to protect investors, maintain fair, orderly, and efficient markets, and facilitate capital formation,” Vance and Tillis wrote.
The agency drew further scrutiny after X said a “preliminary investigation” found the hack was not due to a breach of the social media company’s systems but rather “an unidentified individual obtaining control over a phone number” associated with the account.
The social media company also said the SEC’s account did not have two-factor authentication enabled at the time of the hack.
Several Republican members of the House Financial Services Committee slammed the agency’s apparent lack of security measures in a letter to Gensler on Wednesday.
“This failure is unacceptable, and it is disturbing that your agency could not even meet the standard you require of private industry,” they wrote.
The criticisms of the SEC’s cybersecurity practices come as the agency recently enacted a rule requiring public companies to disclose significant cyber incidents that could affect investor decisions within four business days.
The rule has drawn stiff opposition from congressional Republicans, who are pushing to overturn the requirement using the Congressional Review Act.
However, the cyber disclosure rule is just one of many recent rulemaking and enforcement efforts by the agency under Gensler that have drawn Republican ire.
GOP lawmakers have also accused the SEC of overreach with its proposed climate disclosure rule and have repeatedly criticized what they view as Gensler’s heavy-handed approach to crypto regulation.
While Gensler has often faced Republican criticism, concern over the breach of the SEC’s account took on a bipartisan flavor when Sens. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.) called on the SEC inspector general to probe the incident.
“Given the obvious potential for market manipulation, if X’s statement is correct, the SEC’s social media accounts should have been secured using industry best practices,” Wyden and Lummis wrote.
In a statement, Gensler noted there is “currently no evidence that the unauthorized party gained access to SEC systems, data, devices, or other social media accounts,” while also acknowledging the security concerns raised by the hack.
“The SEC takes its cybersecurity obligations seriously,” Gensler said.
Ron Hammond, director of government relations with the crypto industry group Blockchain Association, said the spotlight on the recent ETF decision “looped in a lot more folks from the traditional side” of finance and gave them “their first taste of what it’s like to be on the crypto side.”
“This was almost just like another week in crypto, just given the craziness that has occurred in this industry and the intersection of DC politics for the past at least two or three years probably, if not longer,” Hammond told The Hill.
Amid the chaos and criticism over the breach, the SEC ultimately approved the 11 spot bitcoin ETFs that were the subject of the hacked posts. The decision, which crypto supporters touted as a “historic outcome,” represents the first time that the agency has permitted the trading of funds directly invested in crypto assets.
The SEC previously rejected all applications for such funds. The agency’s shift on the issue comes after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled in August that it improperly rejected an application for a spot bitcoin ETF from Grayscale Investments.
Gensler appeared less than enthusiastic in his statement about the approvals, describing it as “the most sustainable path forward” given the court’s decision. He also emphasized that the SEC’s approvals were confined to ETFs holding bitcoin.
“It should in no way signal the Commission’s willingness to approve listing standards for crypto asset securities,” Gensler said.
Katz suggested the hack was even more embarrassing for the agency because the SEC chair “didn’t really want to do these approvals anyway.”
Hammond added that Gensler and the agency are “definitely not in a good space” at the moment following the hack.
“We’ll see what happens through the letters and hearings and investigation of the FBI, but they’re not in a good spot at the SEC right now,” he said.
Business, Technology, bitcoin, cryptocurrency, cryptocurrency etfs, SEC hack, Securities and Exchange Commission Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Chair Gary Gensler is facing bipartisan political backlash after the agency’s social media account was hacked last week and falsely claimed it had approved several highly anticipated bitcoin investment funds. While the SEC ultimately approved the exchange-traded funds (ETFs) holding bitcoin about 24 hours later, the high-profile blunder for the…
Business
How Trump’s Tariffs Could Hit American Wallets

As the debate over tariffs heats up ahead of the 2024 election, new analysis reveals that American consumers could face significant financial consequences if former President Donald Trump’s proposed tariffs are enacted and maintained. According to a recent report highlighted by Forbes, the impact could be felt across households, businesses, and the broader U.S. economy.

The Household Cost: Up to $2,400 More Per Year
Research from Yale University’s Budget Lab, cited by Forbes, estimates that the average U.S. household could pay an additional $2,400 in 2025 if the new tariffs take effect and persist. This projection reflects the cumulative impact of all tariffs announced in Trump’s plan.
Price Hikes Across Everyday Goods
The tariffs are expected to drive up consumer prices by 1.8% in the near term. Some of the hardest-hit categories include:
- Apparel: Prices could jump 37% in the short term (and 18% long-term).
- Footwear: Up 39% short-term (18% long-term).
- Metals: Up 43%.
- Leather products: Up 39%.
- Electrical equipment: Up 26%.
- Motor vehicles, electronics, rubber, and plastic products: Up 11–18%.
- Groceries: Items like vegetables, fruits, and nuts could rise up to 6%, with additional increases for coffee and orange juice due to specific tariffs on Brazilian imports.

A Historic Tariff Rate and Economic Impact
If fully implemented, the effective tariff rate on U.S. consumers could reach 18%, the highest level since 1934. The broader economic consequences are also notable:
- GDP Reduction: The tariffs could reduce U.S. GDP by 0.4% annually, equating to about $110 billion per year.
- Revenue vs. Losses: While tariffs are projected to generate $2.2 trillion in revenue over the next decade, this would be offset by $418 billion in negative economic impacts.
How Businesses Are Responding
A KPMG survey cited in the report found that 83% of business leaders expect to raise prices within six months of tariff implementation. More than half say their profit margins are already under pressure, suggesting that consumers will likely bear the brunt of these increased costs.

What This Means for Americans
The findings underscore the potential for substantial financial strain on American families and businesses if Trump’s proposed tariffs are enacted. With consumer prices set to rise and economic growth projected to slow, the debate over tariffs is likely to remain front and center in the months ahead.
For more in-depth economic analysis and updates, stay tuned to Bolanlemedia.com.
Business
U.S. Limits Nigerian Non-Immigrant Visas to Three-Month Validity

In July 2025, the United States implemented significant changes to its visa policy for Nigerian citizens, restricting most non-immigrant and non-diplomatic visas to a single entry and a maximum validity of three months. This marks a departure from previous policies that allowed for multiple entries and longer stays, and has important implications for travel, business, and diplomatic relations between the two countries.

Key Changes in U.S. Visa Policy for Nigerians
- Single-Entry, Three-Month Limit: As of July 8, 2025, most non-immigrant visas issued to Nigerians are now valid for only one entry and up to three months.
- No Retroactive Impact: Visas issued prior to this date remain valid under their original terms.
- Reciprocity Principle: The U.S. cited alignment with Nigeria’s own visa policies for U.S. citizens as the basis for these changes.
- Enhanced Security Screening: Applicants are required to make their social media accounts public for vetting, and are subject to increased scrutiny for any signs of hostility toward U.S. institutions.

Rationale Behind the Policy Shift
- Security and Immigration Integrity: The U.S. government stated the changes are intended to safeguard the immigration system and meet global security standards.
- Diplomatic Reciprocity: These restrictions mirror the limitations Nigeria imposes on U.S. travelers, emphasizing the principle of fairness in international visa agreements.
- Potential for Further Action: The U.S. has indicated that additional travel restrictions could be introduced if Nigeria does not address certain diplomatic and security concerns.

Nigeria’s Updated Visa Policy
- Nigeria Visa Policy 2025 (NVP 2025): Introduced in May 2025, this policy features a new e-Visa system for short visits and reorganizes visa categories:
- Short Visit Visas (e-Visa): For business or tourism, valid up to three months, non-renewable, processed digitally within 48 hours.
- Temporary Residence Visas: For employment or study, valid up to two years.
- Permanent Residence Visas: For investors, retirees, and highly skilled individuals.
- Visa Exemptions: ECOWAS citizens and certain diplomatic passport holders remain exempt.
- Reciprocal Restrictions: Most short-stay and business visas for U.S. citizens are single-entry and short-term, reflecting reciprocal treatment.

Impact on Travelers and Bilateral Relations
- Nigerian Travelers: Face increased administrative requirements, higher costs, and reduced travel flexibility to the U.S.
- U.S. Travelers to Nigeria: Encounter similar restrictions, with most visas limited to single entry and short duration.
- Diplomatic Tensions: Nigerian officials have called for reconsideration of the U.S. policy, warning of negative effects on bilateral ties and people-to-people exchanges.
Conclusion
The U.S. decision to limit Nigerian non-immigrant visas to three months highlights the growing complexity and reciprocity in global visa regimes. Both countries are tightening their policies, citing security and fairness, which underscores the need for travelers and businesses to stay informed and adapt to evolving requirements.
Business
Nicki Minaj Demands $200 Million from Jay-Z in Explosive Twitter Rant

Nicki Minaj has once again set social media ablaze, this time targeting Jay-Z with a series of pointed tweets that allege he owes her an eye-popping $200 million. The outburst has reignited debates about artist compensation, industry transparency, and the ongoing power struggles within hip-hop’s elite circles.

The $200 Million Claim
In a string of tweets, Minaj directly addressed Jay-Z, writing, “Jay-Z, call me to settle the karmic debt. It’s only collecting more interest. You still in my top five though. Let’s get it.” She went further, warning, “Anyone still calling him Hov will answer to God for the blasphemy.” According to Minaj, the alleged debt stems from Jay-Z’s sale of Tidal, the music streaming platform he launched in 2015 with a group of high-profile artists—including Minaj herself, J. Cole, and Rihanna.
When Jay-Z sold Tidal in 2021, Minaj claims she was only offered $1 million, a figure she says falls dramatically short of what she believes she is owed based on her ownership stake and contributions. She has long voiced dissatisfaction with the payout, but this is the most public—and dramatic—demand to date.
Beyond the Money: Broader Grievances
Minaj’s Twitter storm wasn’t limited to financial complaints. She also:
- Promised to start a college fund for her fans if she receives the money she claims is owed.
- Accused blogs and online creators of ignoring her side of the story, especially when it involves Jay-Z.
- Warned content creators about posting “hate or lies,” saying, “They won’t cover your legal fees… I hope it’s worth losing everything including your account.”
She expressed frustration that mainstream blogs and platforms don’t fully cover her statements, especially when they involve Jay-Z, and suggested that much of the coverage she receives is from less reputable sources.

Satirical Accusations and Industry Critique
Minaj’s tweets took a satirical turn as she jokingly blamed Jay-Z for a laundry list of cultural grievances, including:
- The state of hip-hop, football, basketball, and touring
- The decline of Instagram and Twitter
- Even processed foods and artificial dyes in candy
She repeatedly declared, “The jig is up,” but clarified that her statements were “alleged and for entertainment purposes only.”
Political and Cultural Criticism
Minaj also criticized Jay-Z’s political involvement, questioning why he didn’t campaign more actively for Kamala Harris or respond to President Obama’s comments about Black men. While Jay-Z has a history of supporting Democratic campaigns, Minaj’s critique centered on more recent events and what she perceives as a lack of advocacy for the Black community.
The Super Bowl and Lil Wayne
Adding another layer to her grievances, Minaj voiced disappointment that Lil Wayne was not chosen to perform at the Super Bowl in New Orleans, a decision she attributes to Jay-Z’s influence in the entertainment industry.
Public and Industry Reaction
Despite the seriousness of her financial claim, many observers note that if Minaj truly believed Jay-Z owed her $200 million, legal action—not social media—would likely follow. As of now, there is no public record of a lawsuit or formal complaint.
Some fans and commentators see Minaj’s outburst as part of a larger pattern of airing industry grievances online, while others interpret it as a mix of personal frustration and performance art. Minaj herself emphasized that her tweets were “for entertainment purposes only.”

Conclusion
Nicki Minaj’s explosive Twitter rant against Jay-Z has once again placed the spotlight on issues of artist compensation and industry dynamics. Whether her claims will lead to further action or remain another dramatic chapter in hip-hop’s ongoing soap opera remains to be seen, but for now, the world is watching—and tweeting.
- Business1 week ago
Pros and Cons of the Big Beautiful Bill
- Advice3 weeks ago
What SXSW 2025 Filmmakers Want Every New Director to Know
- Film Industry3 weeks ago
Filming Yourself and Look Cinematic
- News2 weeks ago
Father Leaps Overboard to Save Daughter on Disney Dream Cruise
- Politics4 weeks ago
Bolanle Newsroom Brief: Israel Strikes Iran’s Nuclear Sites — What It Means for the World
- Health2 weeks ago
McCullough Alleges Government Hid COVID Vaccine Side Effects
- Advice2 weeks ago
Why 20% of Us Are Always Late
- Advice2 weeks ago
How to Find Your Voice as a Filmmaker