Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong has frowned at the Wall Street Journal over their recent publications and a potential story they are working on, which he believes to be a scheme against Coinbase and himself.
A recent X post shared by the renowned exchange founder revealed that the journal is working on an upcoming report that could tell a false story, as they seem to be in alliance with theories from banks.
Armstrong says WSJ is hostile
Following the Senate's recent rejection of the crypto CLARITY bill, Armstrong has raised alarm that the Journal is preparing a story that portrays him as partly responsible for the Senate's failure to pass the bill.
Notably, he backed this up with claims that the publication has been "hostile" toward the CLARITY Act, noting that the Wall Street Journal has consistently published reports that repeatedly reflected the views of banks that have also been pushing against the bill.
Armstrong noted that he had joined efforts to work on the CLARITY Act to make it a bill worthy of consideration, thereby debunking potential misinformation from the journal.
Armstrong shares brief back story
Armstrong acknowledged that he had previously opposed the legislation earlier this year. However, he stated that his opposition was directed at an older version of the bill, not the final draft that reached the Senate.
Furthermore, he explained that he did not support the January version of the bill before it went to a committee vote because he believed it still had major problems involving DeFi, tokenization, the authority of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), and rewards tied to stablecoins.
He also noted that the bill lacked the necessary support it needed to pass at the time; however, Armstrong revealed that Coinbase worked with other stakeholders to improve the legislation rather than abandoning it.
Armstrong further praised the final version of the bill, which he believed was fit to have been passed by the Senate, mentioning that the four issues he had raised had been addressed by the time the bill returned to committee roughly four months later.