ayano.

寝屋川の中3♡ダーリンぉるょ◡̈♥︎でもみんなフォローして♡スライドしたょな？フォローしてや

[Rob Cunningham @KuwlShow]

• XRP Price Before Law v 2.0 •

Last Friday’s major institutional question was:

“Why should we expose ourselves to digital assets before Congress tells us exactly what everything is?”

Also the “John Thune would suck in the WNBA, too” week in DC.

Today, the increasingly defensible boardroom question has become:

“Why are we refusing even to prepare for an asset class and financial architecture that the Executive Branch has expressly directed federal regulators to integrate into the traditional financial system?”

EO 14405 & EO 14406 signed on May 19, 2026, now offer a profound inversion of institutional risk, thanks to Lady Thune.

And then comes the Federal Reserve provision, too.

This may ultimately be the most strategically important part of EO 14405.

President Trump specifically requested that the Federal Reserve conduct a comprehensive review of whether uninsured depositories and non-bank financial firms - explicitly including firms (like @Ripple) engaged in digital assets and novel financial activities - can obtain direct access to Federal Reserve payment accounts and services. His EO asks the Fed to analyze legal authority, barriers, risk-management structures and options for expanding access. Where existing law permits access, it asks for transparent application procedures and decisions on complete applications within 90 days.

The institutional message is much bigger than “Trump supports crypto”

EO 14405 does something unusually important for bank boards, investment committees and general counsels: it establishes as formal policy of the United States that federal regulation should permit the integration of digital assets and innovative technology into traditional financial services and payment systems, while removing unnecessary barriers that favor incumbents.

It expressly sweeps in 11 areas:
payments
derivatives
investment management
brokerage
underwriting
capital markets
custody
fiduciary services
securities
commodities and
blockchain-based services

Think about the architectural implication.

For most of crypto’s history, the industry sat outside the monetary fortress, accessing traditional payment infrastructure through banking intermediaries.

EO 14405 asks whether portions of that wall can legally become a door.

It doesn’t grant every crypto company a master account. It does something institutionally significant nonetheless: it moves direct access by digital-financial businesses from something regulators might resist philosophically to something the Federal Reserve has been formally asked by the President to evaluate and justify structurally.

And EO 14406 provides the other half of the institutional equation

This is where the two orders operate almost like a matched pair.

EO 14405 says:

Integrate innovation. Reduce artificial barriers. Examine payment-system access.

EO 14406 says:

Do it while strengthening financial integrity, BSA compliance, customer identification and defenses against illicit finance.

The second order directs Treasury and banking regulators toward stronger risk-based customer due-diligence and customer-identification requirements, while identifying money laundering, trafficking, fraudulent identity structures and unlawful cross-border activity as priorities.

That matters enormously to boards.

Because the strongest institutional argument against digital assets was never merely “crypto is volatile.”

It was:

Regulatory risk + AML risk + reputational risk + counterparty risk + uncertain classification = don’t touch it.

The Administration’s emerging framework is effectively separating those issues:

Innovation is legitimate. Digital assets belong inside regulated finance. Access should be evaluated. Bad actors should be policed aggressively.

That is a much easier proposition for a compliance committee to defend.

@realDonaldTrump @SecScottBessent @federalreserve @CFTC @SECGov @fairshake

[Vincent Van Code @vincent_vancode]

I have been in many negotiations.

When it's in good faith, parties will review, markup, change, review, but always negotiating sticky points and moving ahead.

When a petty wishes to sabotage negotiations, they leave a little clause or point unchallenged in multiple drafts, and a few days prior to signing, they bring it up.

This creates duress and pressure that unhinges the opposing party, resulting in them getting what they want.

Clarity Act is no different. I still think it will happen, it may not be a favorable act in terms of the likes of @brian_armstrong or even Trump. But it will happen.

Not passing into law means potentially 1 toc2 year delay, during which time industries will move overseas.

And don't forget this: absolutely NOTHING ILLEFAL about an overseas company minting USD stablecoins. You don't have to be made in USA. THEN, WTF are these clown Dems going to do when the countries flood digital USD into the global market outside of their control.

A big fkn woopsy. They cut off their nose to spite their faces

[Sui Intern @suintern_]

JUST IN:

SUI JUST BUILT A BUYBACK ENGINE THAT GETS STRONGER AS STABLECOIN ADOPTION GROWS 🤯🤯🤯

Every new dollar flowing into the ecosystem can help power daily $SUI buybacks, creating a long-term growth flywheel driven by stablecoin adoption, not speculation alone.

The more the ecosystem grows, the stronger the buyback engine becomes.

[Patrice @pvt_patrice]

🚨 Most meme launchpads don’t have a meme problem.

They have a trust problem.
Fake liquidity.
Hidden mint functions.
Unsafe wallet approvals.
Projects disappearing overnight.

Crypto became too easy to launch and too hard to trust.
That’s why AssCool is building differently 🧵

[CryptoGuerrilla ⚔️ @Crypto_Guerrila]

$APT minimum value right now should be the market-cap of $SUI - anything other than that is an abhorrence in capital misallocation.

As long as SUI marketcap is greater than Aptos - then Aptos has explosive room for growth.

Why do I compare the two?

Because SUI is a copy-pasta second comer.

SUI is the Bitcoin Cash to to Aptos' Bitcoin - except we are in a parallel universe of capital allocation.

Fundamentally, Aptos is winning on almost all key metrics.

Price-wise, large paid influencer & community sentiment wise; SUI is decimating Aptos, mainly again due to price action.

In fact, since launch Aptos has only ever been in a macro-down trend, it has never; I repeat never seen a macro up-trend. Filthy.

It will be interesting to see just how explosive Aptos can get when it finally makes it's first higher low and higher high - ever....

I expect this will start happening some stage this year...

Few reasons:

1/ VCs & Core Contributors - the 2 biggest points of sell pressure for Aptos - finally ends this September/October.

2/ Bitcoin generally bottoms between July-October of Bear Market years. We are in the window of July-October of the bear market year.

3/ Aptos is grossly undervalued, and immensely oversold - worst performer in the Top 100 for the last year, bar none.

Aptos growth at a minimum is 6x and whatever SUI grows this bull run - to match SUI market cap, at a minimum.

If SUI does a 10x, then Aptos needs a 60x; if SUI does a 20x, then Aptos needs a 120x to retain minimum fair value relative to SUI - that's the math.

[winner @winner_xbt]

When I say $SUI is going to $30, I am actually not hyping.

That is the bare minimum of what $SUI is worth.

Just know $SUI is highly undervalued at this price, and the bear market is making it worse.

If the bull market returns, $SUI will do multiple Xs. We have seen it happen with $SOL and recently hyperliquid:native.

ATL of $SOL: $0.5052
ATH of $SOL: $294.33 (580X)

ATL of hyperliquid:native: $3.20
ATH of hyperliquid:native: $76.85 (24X)

ATL of $SUI: $0.3624
Next ATH of $SUI: $30 (83X)

[More Crypto Online @Morecryptoonl]

why is $SUI so dead?

[BSCN @BSCNews]

Aptos Patches Flaw That Risked $70B

Two ethical hackers uncovered a critical flaw in Aptos (@Aptos) that theoretically exposed up to $70 billion in network value before it was patched, per Coinbureau.

The exploit targeted Aptos' core consensus mechanism and reportedly achieved nearly a 90% success rate.

Researchers said the attack required a server costing about $3,000 and only hundreds of dollars to execute.
The vulnerability has since been fixed.

[Crypto Rover @cryptorover]

🚨 BITCOIN JUST FLASHED THE SAME BOTTOM STRUCTURE THAT APPEARED BEFORE THE 2023 RALLY.

In both cycles, BTC formed a “June bottom” first.

Then came a fake recovery, RSI divergence, and one final flush before the real bottom was in.

Bitcoin crashed another -28% after the June 2022 bottom.

If this fractal repeats, Bitcoin may still need one final panic move before Q3/Q4 reversal.

[Monero (XMR) @monero]

The Monero hashrate continues to grow!

A warm welcome to all new Monero miners!

[VOLTIX @VOLTIXSOL]

$Bullcoin top trending on pumpfun

The bull isn’t stopping anytime soon

[Whale Insider @WhaleInsider]

JUST IN: Bitcoin warning signs flash as $BTC inflows surge above 50,000 per day, signaling incoming volatility - CryptoQuant.

[Aptos @Aptos]

The full stack for markets and machines never stops moving.

[Pump.fun Ecosystem @PumpfunEco]

$BURNIE is rallying, up 40% in the past hour 👀

[Pranjal Bora 🧭 @Crypto_Pranjal]

@cryptoeddyyy It's a trading platform where you can trade perps and prediction.

[JAKE @JakeGagain]

Who's Still Holding $PEPE?!

[Saint @Saintnfa]

Shill me ONE memecoin that will go PARABOLIC this weekend 😮‍💨💰

[Renesis.fi @renesisfi]

Aave's dominance in DeFi lending keeps growing.

• Surpassed $1T in cumulative loans originated
• Reached $3.46T in lifetime deposits
• Processes $88B+ in monthly volume
• Hit an ATH of ~155k monthly active users
• Controls 60%+ of DeFi lending market share

And now @aave V4 has crossed its first $1M in liquidations.

We're super bullish on @aave. That's why Aave is integrated into @renesisfi, enabling funds to track, manage & scale their Aave exposure from a single platform.

[Minimilian @Minimilian84]

Me thinking about when Litecoin will pump.