Jonathon

[Dear Son. @DearS_o_n]

Tweet of all time.

[Jon Najarian @jonnajarian]

Erin @OutFrontCNN will you give similar coverage to double digit million-dollar Dem/Lefty contributors George Soros, Michael Bloomberg, Donald Sussman, Reid Hoffman, Jim Simons, Karla Jurvetson, S. Donald Sussman, Fred Eychaner, Jeffrey Katzenberg, Laurene Powell Jobs?

[Jonathon @MapDisTradeDat]

Block everyone who starts a post with “Serious Question” or “Breaking”

[Jonathon @MapDisTradeDat]

@jimcramer is selling his bitcoin:native. You know what to do now. Yes, multi signature is necessary.

[Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent @SecScottBessent]

More than a year ago, the House passed the Clarity Act.

There’s been progress since — thousands of hours of bipartisan negotiations took place at the staff and Member levels. The Senate Committees on Banking and Agriculture advanced their respective titles. And Senate Republicans produced a floor-ready product that, as I type this, is waiting for a vote.

It’s disappointing — but not surprising — that Senate Democrats are choosing politics on the cusp of a major victory for American leadership. Find another instance in history where Congress, when given the choice, opted to push an industry out of the United States rather than smartly regulate it. American Exceptionalism was once a bipartisan goal; if Clarity fails, I have serious doubts.

These same Democrats — many of whom have taken millions of dollars from the crypto industry — proclaim that Clarity lacks safeguards for consumers and falls short in countering illicit finance. Nothing could be further from the truth. Titles II and III materially uplift regulatory and compliance obligations for digital asset intermediaries, placing them on similar footing with traditional financial institutions. The Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act — which Washington lobbyists have spun up as a boogeyman for certain groups of prosecutors and law enforcement — does nothing other than codify longstanding Treasury Department policy that’s remained consistent across Administrations: non-custodial builders and developers are not, and have never been, subject to registration obligations under the Bank Secrecy Act. And at this point, major law enforcement trades that once opposed the bill, including the Fraternal Order of Police, have now endorsed it.

The Senate needs to vote NOW on this landmark legislation. The truth is that Senate Democrats are afraid to advance the Clarity Act as they fear Senator Warren and the “Anti-Crypto Army” she once promised to build. In the days ahead, Leader Thune will put this theory to the test. Will Senate Democrats be on the side of American Exceptionalism, or will they opt to cede American leadership of a global industry for fear of the bespectacled squirrel’s Left flank?

America will lead or America won’t. It’s not more complicated than that. I believe Satoshi once said it best:

“If you don’t believe me or don’t get it, I don’t have time to try to convince you, sorry.”

[Jonathon @MapDisTradeDat]

@asklivermore Selling $QQQ puts everyday 140-150 days out. Targeting 15-18 delta. Easy.

[Jonathon @MapDisTradeDat]

$MU Good idea or Bad idea?

[Jonathon @MapDisTradeDat]

@BeardoTrader Hyperbole alert. Less than 10% is free fall? lol buy the mean reversion and chill.

[Jonathon @MapDisTradeDat]

@JayCostaUSA Hey mamDicklessdami, you got 1 hour delivery?

[SightBringer @_The_Prophet__]

⚡️BIP-110 should die.

The proposal crosses Bitcoin’s constitutional line by turning a faction’s judgment about acceptable transaction purpose into consensus law.

Once that precedent survives, every future coalition learns the same lesson: capture enough developers, miners, companies, or public opinion, manufacture an emergency, then rewrite neutrality in the name of protecting the network.

That is how political money is born.

Bitcoin’s deepest property is not merely the 21 million cap. It is the credible assurance that nobody can easily alter the rules governing property after capital enters. Scarcity without rule stability is fragile. Ownership without neutral settlement is conditional. A monetary constitution that changes whenever a powerful faction declares a use illegitimate eventually becomes another discretionary system.

The data-storage externality is real. Nodes carry costs that individual users may not fully pay. Bitcoin must still address measurable burdens through fees, relay policy, technical efficiency, and conservative engineering. The network cannot begin judging what bytes mean. The moment consensus distinguishes virtuous transactions from undesirable transactions, miners stop serving a market and begin enforcing an ideology.

Saylor sees the danger clearly because this is Bitcoin’s post-victory phase.

External attacks strengthened the network. Bans failed. Ridicule failed. Competing coins failed to capture its monetary consensus. Institutional adoption now introduces the subtler threat: ownership and influence concentrating around custodians, mining pools, ETF issuers, exchanges, treasury companies, regulated intermediaries, and security consortiums.

Bitcoin remains decentralized in code while economic power around the code becomes increasingly centralized.

That is the real terrain.

The institutions entering Bitcoin will initially swear loyalty to neutrality. Later they will discover regulatory obligations, reputational concerns, national-security demands, sanctioned addresses, prohibited content, environmental mandates, and “systemic risks.” Each exception will arrive as a narrow necessity. Every narrow necessity will create infrastructure for the next exception.

The capture sequence is predictable:

First, undesirable behavior is identified.

Then neutrality is framed as irresponsibility.

Then restrictions are presented as temporary protection.

Then dissenters are accused of endangering adoption.

Then the exception becomes precedent.

Then Bitcoin still exists, but ownership increasingly requires permission.

BIP-110 is dangerous because its activation design tries to manufacture inevitability before genuine consensus exists. A contentious cultural dispute does not justify coercive signaling, bundled restrictions, uncertain compatibility costs, or chain-split risk. The technical flaws found around late upgrades make the entire exercise even more reckless.

Bitcoin has reached the stage where the people claiming to protect it may become more dangerous than the people trying to destroy it.

The enemy at the gate could not rewrite the ledger.

The faction inside the walls might persuade participants to rewrite it themselves.

Bitcoin survives victory only if every proposed exception encounters a culture strong enough to ask one question:

Does this preserve neutral, voluntary, permissionless property, or does it give somebody new power over somebody else’s transaction?

BIP-110 gives a faction new power.

Reject it.

[Jonathon @MapDisTradeDat]

@InvestingAddict VOO and chill means don’t worry about the day to day market moves. Means nothing. Maximum time in the market will always reward you.

[Michael Saylor @saylor]

Bitcoin’s consensus rules are its constitution. They define property, scarcity, settlement, and power.

To rewrite them for the convenience of any faction is to attack the economic rights of every participant today and every generation to come.

[Jonathon @MapDisTradeDat]

@start9labs Your rationale opens the door to “attacks”, it most definitely does NOT prevent them. Ignore the noise of this ridiculous post.

[Joe Burnett, MSBA @IIICapital]

Unpopular opinions:

1. I like self-custody Bitcoin.

2. I like Bitcoin's current consensus rules.

3. Bitcoin's consensus rules should be difficult to change.

4. I like Amplified Bitcoin because I think Bitcoin's CAGR will be > 20% over the next decade.

5. If you're trying to outperform Bitcoin, I prefer long-duration, no-liquidation-risk leverage.

6. I think Digital Credit is the next major catalyst for the billions of people who still don't own Bitcoin.

[Michael Saylor @saylor]

Bitcoin has won. Now it must survive victory.

Its gravest threat is not an enemy at the gates, but corruption from within: factions that invent pretexts, rewrite the rules, and seize economic rights until freedom becomes permission and law becomes loot.

[Jonathon @MapDisTradeDat]

@shawmakesmagic @brian_armstrong Leave Coinbase.

[Jonathon @MapDisTradeDat]

@shawmakesmagic @brian_armstrong Fuck Coinbase.

[Jonathon @MapDisTradeDat]

@sunnydecree Maybe an antidepressant?

[Michael Saylor @saylor]

Bitcoin’s core design is set in stone. Protocol changes should be rare, conservative, and driven by necessity, not ambition.

Don’t fix what isn’t broken.

[Jonathon @MapDisTradeDat]

@dotkrueger Get the 110 out of your tag.