etc.
Let's translate paragraph by paragraph.
Original: "The FBI says crypto-related losses topped $11 billion last year. That's the headline from a new report that landed this week. At the same time, New York Attorney General Letitia James is warning Congress that a pending bill could make things worse. She testified in the Senate that the CLARITY Act would weaken state enforcement against crypto scams."
Translation: "FBI menyatakan kerugian berkaitan kripto mencecah $11 bilion tahun lepas. Itu adalah tajuk utama daripada laporan baharu yang dikeluarkan minggu ini. Pada masa yang sama, Peguam Negara New York, Letitia James, memberi amaran kepada Kongres bahawa rang undang-undang yang belum selesai boleh memburukkan keadaan. Beliau memberi keterangan di Senat bahawa Akta CLARITY akan melemahkan penguatkuasaan negeri terhadap penipuan kripto."
Note: "topped" -> "mencecah" or "melebihi"? "mencecah" is fine. "landed" -> "dikeluarkan" or "tiba"? "landed" here means released, so "dikeluarkan" is good. "pending bill" -> "rang undang-undang yang belum selesai" or "rang undang-undang yang belum diluluskan". We'll use "rang undang-undang yang belum selesai". "testified" -> "memberi keterangan". "state enforcement" -> "penguatkuasaan negeri".
Next h2: "The $11 billion figure" -> "Angka $11 bilion"
Paragraph: "The FBI's tally covers everything from investment fraud to ransomware. It's a staggering number — and it's almost certainly an undercount. Many victims never report losses. The bureau says the figure reflects complaints filed with its Internet Crime Complaint Center. Crypto scams now account for a growing share of the total financial fraud the FBI tracks."
Translation: "Pengiraan FBI merangkumi segala-galanya daripada penipuan pelaburan kepada perisian tebusan. Ia adalah angka yang mengejutkan — dan hampir pasti ia adalah kiraan yang kurang. Ramai mangsa tidak pernah melaporkan kerugian. Biro itu menyatakan angka tersebut mencerminkan aduan yang difailkan dengan Pusat Aduan Jenayah Internetnya. Penipuan kripto kini menyumbang bahagian yang semakin meningkat daripada jumlah penipuan kewangan yang dikesan oleh FBI."
We need to be accurate: "Internet Crime Complaint Center" is a proper noun, we can keep as is or translate? Usually we keep it in English, but we can say "Pusat Aduan Jenayah Internet" but it's a specific name, so we might keep as "Internet Crime Complaint Center" but in Malay context, we might translate. Since it's a proper noun, we can keep it in English. But to be clear, we can say "Pusat Aduan Jenayah Internet (IC3)" but we'll keep as is. Actually, the original says "Internet Crime Complaint Center" - we can translate to "Pusat Aduan Jenayah Internet" but it's not an official Malay name. I'll keep it as "Internet Crime Complaint Center" but in Malay sentence, we can say "Pusat Aduan Jenayah Internet (IC3)"? Better to keep it as "Internet Crime Complaint Center" since it's a specific entity. But the requirement says "Preserve proper nouns" so we keep it in English. So we'll say "Pusat Aduan Jenayah Internet" might be a translation, but it's not a proper noun? Actually it is a proper noun, so we should keep it as is. Let's keep it as "Internet Crime Complaint Center" in English. But then the sentence might be awkward. We'll say "fail dengan Internet Crime Complaint Center" - but that's mixing. Better to say "difailkan dengan Internet Crime Complaint Center" - it's fine.
Alternatively, we can say "Pusat Aduan Jenayah Internet (IC3)" but that might be over-translation. Since it's a proper noun, we keep it. So I'll keep "Internet Crime Complaint Center".
Next h2: "James's Senate testimony" -> "Keterangan James di Senat"
Paragraph: "Letitia James didn't mince words. She told senators the CLARITY Act would strip state attorneys general of key tools they use to go after bad actors. James has been one of the most aggressive state regulators on crypto. Her office has taken on exchanges, lenders, and promoters. She argued that the bill would preempt state laws without offering strong enough federal protections."
Translation: "Letitia James tidak berlembut. Beliau memberitahu senator bahawa Akta CLARITY akan melucutkan alat utama peguam negara negeri yang digunakan untuk mengejar pelaku jenayah. James merupakan salah seorang pengawal selia negeri yang paling agresif dalam hal kripto. Pejabatnya telah mengambil tindakan terhadap bursa, pemberi pinjaman, dan promoter. Beliau berhujah bahawa rang undang-undang itu akan mengatasi undang-undang negeri tanpa menawarkan perlindungan persekutuan yang cukup kuat."
Note: "didn't mince words" -> "tidak berlembut" or "tidak berselindung" but "berlembut" is fine. "strip" -> "melucutkan" or "mengambil" but "melucutkan" is good. "go after" -> "mengejar" or "mengambil tindakan terhadap" but we have "take on" later, so we'll use "mengejar" for "go after". "bad actors" -> "pelaku jenayah" or "pihak yang tidak bertanggungjawab" but "pelaku jenayah" is fine. "preempt" -> "mengatasi" or "mendahului" but here it means to supersede, so "mengatasi" works.
Next h2: "What the CLARITY Act does" -> "Apa yang Akta CLARITY lakukan"
Paragraph: "The bill is designed to create a federal framework for crypto regulation. Supporters say it would bring clarity to a patchwork of state rules. But James and other critics say it goes too far. They argue it would block states from enforcing their own consumer protection laws against crypto firms. The timing isn't great — not with the FBI's $11 billion loss report fresh on the table."
Translation: "Rang undang-undang itu direka untuk me
