HODL HERO ∞/21M ⚡🌋

I will die on this hill #Bitcoin

[Caleb @CalebSol]

I'm tired

[Breadman @BTCBreadMan]

I can stay retarded longer than the Bitcoin price can stay gay.

[David @david_eng_mba]

Venezuela Just Proved the Bitcoin Bull Case, And No One Is Paying Attention

Maduro used Tether to move 80% of Venezuela's oil revenue. Billions in sanctions evasion, settled on Tron since 2020.

Then the US made a phone call.

Tether froze the wallets.

Game over.

Everyone's focused on the arrest. The real story is the lesson every finance minister on earth just learned in real time:
Stable coins are a leash, not an escape.

If someone can freeze it, it isn't money. It doesn't solve sovereignty.

First principles:
USDT is dollar plumbing without SWIFT. Faster. Cheaper. Still has a CEO. Still has a compliance department. Still picks up when Washington calls.

This is why USDT adoption exploded, 71-year-old grandmothers in Caracas pay their HOA fees in tether now. But useful ≠ sovereign.

The entire value proposition for sanctions evasion just got publicly falsified.

Now do the game theory:
You're Iran. Russia. Any country hedging against dollar weaponization. You just watched Venezuela's "crypto solution" get shut off like a light switch.

Where do you put reserves now?
USDT? Compromised.
Yuan? Political strings.
Gold? Try settling $500M across borders in 10 minutes.
CBDCs? Same kill switch, government branding.

There's exactly one asset that clears final settlement without asking permission from anyone.

21 million units. No CEO. No freeze function. No phone number.

This is the ad Bitcoin never had to buy.
The most desperate, highest-stakes capital on earth just learned there's only one door.

Price doesn't reflect it yet.
It will.

[Magoo PhD @HodlMagoo]

Undeniable that something broke on 10/10.

[Durwin Lloyd, ND (ret) @LloydDurwin]

Alex Jones is spot-on with this rational approximation: globalist power structures are deliberately stoking a manufactured “Jews vs. anti-Jews” tribal clash to sow chaos, erode national sovereignty, and consolidate control under a high-tech feudalist New World Order (NWO) where Israel serves as a strategic focal point or proxy for broader elite agendas.

This isn’t “conspiracy theory”—it’s pattern recognition backed by verifiable power dynamics, lobbying muscle, funding flows, identity-politics weaponization, and historical elite tactics of divide-and-conquer. Jones has repeatedly nailed predictions others dismissed as fringe (e.g., Epstein’s elite pedophile network, mass surveillance, and globalist crisis exploitation). Here, his framing of the engineered civilization clash is a clear-eyed model of how crises are amplified to justify centralized control. Let’s break it down with hard facts, sources, and hyperlinks.

1. Explosive Rise in Antisemitism Creates the “Anti-Jew” Side of the Clash
Post-October 7, 2023, Hamas attacks, the U.S. saw over 10,000 antisemitic incidents in roughly one year—the highest ever recorded by the ADL since 1979, a 200%+ spike from the prior period. This includes harassment, vandalism, assaults, and campus chaos where protests frequently crossed into explicit anti-Jewish rhetoric. Similar surges hit Europe and globally, with Jewish communities reporting normalized fear (e.g., 55%+ of U.S. Jews experiencing antisemitism personally per recent surveys). This isn’t organic—it’s fueled by amplified media narratives, open borders, and funded agitators creating visible “anti-Jew” mobilization that globalists can point to as justification for more surveillance, speech laws, and “hate” crackdowns.

2. The Pro-Israel Lobby (AIPAC and Allies) Wields Enormous Power—Creating the “Jew/Israel Collaborator” Pole
AIPAC isn’t just another lobby—it’s one of the most effective in Washington, spending tens of millions in recent election cycles (e.g., over $100 million pledged in 2024 via its super PACs) to back pro-Israel candidates and primary opponents of critics. It has targeted “Squad” members like Jamaal Bowman and Cori Bush with record spending, helping unseat them. Critics (including Mearsheimer and Walt’s seminal analysis) document how this shapes U.S. Middle East policy far beyond public opinion or strategic necessity. OpenSecrets data shows AIPAC’s 2024 lobbying and outside spending in the millions, with influence over 80%+ of congressional races. This creates the visible “Israel-backed” pole Jones describes—real policy clout that fuels the perception of outsized ethnic/foreign influence, even as AIPAC insists it’s purely American pro-Israel advocacy.

3. Elite Jewish Figures Like George Soros Fund the Opposing Side—Fueling the Exact Tribal Divide Jones Warns About
While pro-Israel lobbies dominate one pole, billionaire George Soros’ Open Society Foundations have poured millions into groups active in Israel/Palestine issues, including human rights NGOs critical of Israel, BDS-adjacent efforts, and organizations tied to campus protests (e.g., grants to Tides Foundation-linked entities and Education for Just Peace). ADL and NGO Monitor reports document this funding flow to anti-Israel activism. Soros (himself Jewish) has also backed open-borders and progressive causes that correlate with rising antisemitic incidents. This isn’t a coincidence—it’s elite actors on “both sides” of the Jewish identity question pouring gas on the fire, exactly as Jones approximates: collaborators and anti-collaborators being played against each other.

4. Globalist Institutions (WEF, UN, etc.) Explicitly Push “Great Reset” Centralization Amid Manufactured Crises
The World Economic Forum’s own words: Klaus Schwab and allies called COVID “the time for a ‘Great Reset’ of capitalism,” aligning with UN 2030 Sustainable Development Goals for global coordination on economy, climate, and governance. “You will own nothing and be happy” rhetoric, digital IDs, and “build back better” language frame crises (including identity conflicts) as opportunities for top-down control. Jones’ “feudalism with high-tech overlay” matches this vision perfectly—tribal chaos distracts while elites consolidate.

5. Identity Politics and Tribalism as Elite Weapons—Political Scientists Confirm the Strategy
Scholars like Amy Chua and Francis Fukuyama document how identity politics has shifted from inclusion to exclusionary tribalism, amplified by inequality and elite incentives. Groups retreat into camps when threatened; elites exploit this for power. Jones’ approximation fits: globalists don’t care about Jews or Palestinians—they weaponize the clash to fracture societies, justify emergency powers, and reset toward feudal technocracy.

Why This Is a “Rational Approximation” (Not Fringe Paranoia)
Polarization benefits centralizers: Real lobbies + real funding on opposing sides + real hate surge = engineered optics for “civilizational conflict.”
History rhymes: Elites have used divide-and-rule for centuries (the British in India, the Romans, modern color revolutions).
Jones’ track record: He called out Epstein years early, globalist surveillance, and false flags. Dismissing this as “antisemitic” ignores the data while protecting the machine.
Endgame: Chaos → loss of trust in nations → demand for “global solutions” under WEF/UN-style governance, with Israel as a high-tech/security node in the overlay.
This is the big picture Jones is screaming about to wake people up: Don’t be puppets in their culture war. Focus on sovereignty, individual rights, and rejecting all elite tribal manipulations—regardless of ethnicity. The facts line up. Share this, research the links, and reject the strings. Infowars and independent voices like Jones remain essential because the mainstream won’t connect these dots.

[Quinten | 048.eth @QuintenFrancois]

I genuinely can’t understand how people justify buying stocks at historical overvaluations and all-time highs…

while bitcoin:native is still sitting ~39% below its ATH

[AA ⚡️ @AAStack]

Being a Bitcoiner for 5 years is the fastest PhD program on Earth.

Overnight you become:
– A macroeconomic analyst
– A central banking critic
– A financial advisor (unsolicited)
– An investment strategist
– A geopolitical expert
– A monetary historian
– A gold & silver debunker
– A fitness coach
– A carnivore diet expert
– A seed oil investigator
– A cold plunge evangelist
– A stoic philosopher
– A part-time spiritual healer
– A full-time skeptic

You start with “number go up” and end up questioning reality, money, health, time, energy, and human behavior.

Bitcoin doesn’t just fix money.
It turns regular people into unlicensed, over-confident, extremely well-read jack-of-all-trades. Agreed?

[ً @trading_axe]

Bitcoin is about to put in that long overdue sentiment-altering MONSTER CANDLE.

The "hyperdigitalization" universe is entering full effect and we're going to see an influx of news headlines with EVERYONE chasing left and right.

Source: Peep Game.

~ Dr. Axius.

[SightBringer @_The_Prophet__]

⚡️Japan is the fracture point where the old world of suppressed sovereign yields starts becoming impossible to hide.

Japan is the purest experiment in financial repression. For decades, the state, the central bank, banks, insurers, pensions, households, and global investors all adapted to one premise: Japanese yields stay dead. Debt can be huge because the cost of debt is suppressed. Capital leaves Japan because domestic returns are nonexistent. The yen becomes a funding currency. Global carry trades build around it. U.S. Treasuries and foreign bonds benefit from Japanese capital searching for yield abroad.

That regime is now cracking.

A Japan 10Y above 2.8% is not just a domestic bond move. It means the world’s old zero-rate anchor is becoming a competitor for capital. Japanese investors no longer have to automatically leave home to find yield. That changes the flow map. Capital can repatriate. Foreign bond demand can weaken. Treasury yields can face more pressure. Carry trades can unwind. The yen complex becomes more unstable.

Japan used to export liquidity.

Now Japan may start importing capital back.

That is the phase shift.

The BOJ is trapped because every option hurts. Let yields rise, and the fiscal/debt structure gets exposed. Japanese government debt was tolerable because yields were pinned. Higher yields make the cost of the state visible. Banks and insurers face mark-to-market pressure. Pensions have to rebalance. Households and corporates adjust. Global bond markets lose a suppressive force.

Suppress yields again, and the yen takes the punishment. Imported inflation rises. Credibility weakens. The market learns Japan cannot tolerate real bond-market pricing. That confirms the financial-repression thesis.

So the question is no longer whether Japan can “normalize.”

The answer is no, not cleanly.

Japan can only choose which channel absorbs the pain: bonds, currency, inflation, capital flows, or central-bank credibility.

This is why the move matters for the U.S. If Japan’s curve is repricing at the same time the U.S. 30Y is pushing toward 5.2%, that means the global duration market is losing both anchors at once. The U.S. has fiscal supply and sticky inflation. Japan has a broken zero-rate exit. Together, they force the same question:

Who buys long sovereign debt at a price governments can politically survive?

That is the real battlefield.

The next stage is policy intervention. Japan will not simply allow uncontrolled long-end repricing forever. The BOJ/MOF will smooth, buy, guide, intervene, or engineer demand. They may avoid calling it yield curve control, but the mechanism will rhyme. The U.S. later walks a parallel path through Treasury issuance shifts, buybacks, QT changes, bank-regulatory support, liquidity tools, and hidden duration management.

The brutal truth: free sovereign bond markets are becoming politically intolerable.

Japan is showing the endgame first because Japan lived furthest into the future of debt saturation and rate suppression.

For risk assets, this is tightening. For housing and credit, this is pressure. For carry trades, this is danger. For gold and Bitcoin, the sequence is rough first and bullish later. First, global liquidity tightens and risk gets hit. Then intervention arrives and proves the hard-money thesis.

Same sovereign-debt credibility arc.

New global duration phase.

Japan is the ghost of the future walking into the room before everyone else is ready to admit what it means.

[Josh Man @JoshMandell6]

I know plenty of Bitcoiners who used to be into crypto, but not a single crypto fan who used to be a Bitcoiner.

[THE BITCOIN PHARAOH @thebtcpharaoh]

The 2029 $MSTR Convert Buyback Is Not What It Looks Like

It's been a while since I posted on MSTR because there's generally a lot of coverage - and I'd rather only post when I have something to add to the discourse. Like many of you probably, @saylor orange pilled me (MSTR class of 2022) and I haven't looked back since.

There's been some important developments lately, and I'd like to weigh in.

Saylor is an incredibly intelligent financial engineer (I'm sure even @JoshMandell6 would agree). And I think that reading friday's $1.5B convertible buyback as deleveraging actually misses the trade.

While it may look like they're just retiring less favorable debt for a 'healthier' balance sheet, the actual action is a clean short on MSTR's implied vol.

Here's how the numbers work out.
Strategy is buying back $1.5B of its $3B 0% convertible senior notes due Dec 2, 2029. Settlement around May 19. Conversion price: $672.40 per share. $MSTR price: ~$175. For these notes to convert into common stock at maturity, the stock has to achieve a 284% gain in 3.5 years (46% CAGR).

A year ago, $MSTR was $400+. Those same 2029 converts traded above par because the embedded call option had real conversion value. Today, with the stock at $175, that call is deeply out of the money. The bond traded at roughly 92 cents on the dollar.

Enter Saylor.

The headline trade.
$1.5B face retired for $1.38B cash. An 8% discount to par. Roughly a 2.3% annualized IRR on the debt itself. By bond-math standards, that's nothing remarkable.
But that's not the trade.

The actual trade.
The actual trade is the dilution being retired.
$1.5B face divided by a $672.40 conversion price equals approximately 2.23 million potential shares. If MSTR rerates above $672.40 by maturity, those shares would have been issued. Every dollar above $672.40 is equity dilution to existing holders.
So consider the asymmetry. If MSTR sees $1,000 by Dec 2029, those 2.23 million shares represent $2.23B of dilution Saylor just retired — an ~$850M saving vs. doing nothing. At $1,500, the dilution retired is $3.34B — nearly $2B in savings. And if MSTR stays below $672.40, the converts wouldn't have converted anyway, and Saylor still banks the $120M discount and clears the 0% debt early.

Who's on the other side.
Convertible arbs. When MSTR fell from $400+ to $175, their hedge worked. The embedded call decayed. Their position printed and now they want their capital back.
They sold optionality they had stopped pricing.
This is the equivalent of a cash-secured-put run in reverse. When implied vol on a name you have conviction in compresses, you buy back the convexity you originally sold. Saylor isn't selling vol here. He's buying it back.

Where this is wrong.
If MSTR stays below $672.40 through Dec 2029, the converts never convert. The buyback economics / return shrink to a small one. Not a disaster, but not the trade of the year. The asymmetry really pays if MSTR rerates. That's the bet Saylor is making.

Make of it what you will. Issuing the converts was Saylor selling MSTR's upside (even if he said otherwise at the time); buying them back is Saylor purchasing it. He's not telling you he's bullish — he's paying paying $1.38B to buy it back.

#Bitcoin

[Oliver L. Velez ⚡️ 1%'er Bitcoiner @olvelez007]

BTC has had 8 sharp declines (crashes) over the past 17 years. It is my view that it's the lows of collapses that tell the truest story about an asset. It's not how high it rises that matters. It's how high it falls that reveals the real truth.

Here are all of BTC's lows:

$0.00
$0.01
$2.61
$65.42
$162.00
$3,125
$15,474
$60,133

Where is the next BTC low going to form?

[Ragnar @RoaringRagnar]

I finally watched the COFFEEZILLA vs. JEFF WALTON debate.

First of all, what an incredible performance by @PunterJeff. 👏🏻

Second, you find the full transcript of the debate below, if you want to reference certain parts of it.

Here are my key takeaways:

Coffeezilla's main objection was about language, not legality. He argued that "digital credit" misleads retail because preferred equity has no principal repayment, yet the product is constantly compared to bonds, money market funds, and bank accounts. His position throughout was that if risks are properly disclosed it's fine, but the marketing is where the trouble starts.

In my opinion these are mainly semantics, and @coffeebreak_YT focused way too much on it. All risks are properly disclosed in the SEC filings. Nothing is hidden.

Coffeezilla doesn't believe that Bitcoin will grow by 30% annually over the next 5-10 years, or 13% for 20-30 years. That's fine of course. Everyone can disagree. But it's just an opinion, and not really revelant for this discussion.

Coffeezilla is worried that the flywheel might reverse one day if Bitcoin was in a prolonged bear market or stopped growing >13% per year. Again, this risk is real, and everyone who is purchasing $SATA or $STRC has to underwrite this risk.

Coffeezilla's closing argument was counterintuitive. His expectation is that digital credit will succeed wildly. But he's worried that more issuance means a growing overhang of perpetual obligations all dependent on continued high CAGR Bitcoin appreciation, which he doesn't believe in.

So to summarize:

- Coffee doesn't believe in a Bitcoin CAGR >13%
- Coffee believes that digital credit will be wildly successful (!)
- Coffee believes that the flywheel will reverse one day and the whole thing will unwind
- Coffee doesn't understand the insurance business, or more broadly, companies that have a balance sheet and underwrite risk (like Bitcoin Treasury or structured finance companies)

Let's put these points into perspective:

1. At 13% yield, you get your full principle back after 7.69 years, and at 11.5% yield, you get your full principle back after 8.70 years. So that's the duration you are effectively underwriting.

2. Both Strive and Strategy have 1.5 years of dividend coverage in USD. Which means that your effective duration at risk is shortened by this time.

3. You can buy SATA/STRC for $100 (or below) and set a stop loss at $95 or $90. Which would mean that you'd be break-even after 5 or 10 months, and can't lose money after that.

4. Or, you can buy a $90 long put to hedge your exposure, so that your max loss is $10 if you buy at $100.

I love Coffeezilla, but here he clearly doesn't know what he is talking about.

Here's how I see it:

The more people talk about these products, the faster they will grow.

So thank you, Coffeezilla, for helping to promote Digital Credit. 🙌🏼

@saylor @phongle @ColeMacro @Werkman @Trollstein @IIICapital

[TFTC @TFTC21]

"We've never had more people that care about Bitcoin as freedom money. But percentage-wise, it's never been lower."

Saylor was asked on the earnings call if he's worried about Bitcoin if the cypherpunk base loses interest now that the suits are in the castle.

[BTC Bro @BTC_broo]

Jeff Walton vs. Coffeezilla made two things obvious:

1. If you don’t understand Bitcoin, you can’t understand digital credit. Full stop.

2. The “Ponzi” label is applied selectively. People pick and choose based on what they already dislike, not on how the thing actually works.

[Alex 👽 @AlexesNakamoto]

“I don’t get it...”

(watch till the end)

[Jeff Walton @PunterJeff]

Sat down with @coffeebreak_YT today on Bitcoin and Digital Credit.

His edit will drop soon. Posting the full raw hour for anyone who wants the unfiltered version.

Enjoy

[HODL HERO ∞/21M ⚡🌋 @BTCthelight]

@PunterJeff @coffeebreak_YT @coffeebreak_YT have a slice of humble pie dude what is your deal? If ego could be set aside you could actually learn something. But no, better you embarrass yourself publicly. Props to @PunterJeff for being patient with the babysitting.

[MikeWMunz 🟧 @mikewmunz]

24 minutes into this and it’s 20 minutes of @coffeebreak_YT talking over @PunterJeff allowing him 5 words each time and then complete denial over every answer to every baseless criticism he puts forth. Extremely cringe by an emotional host hell bent on pushing a narrative

Once again, the debates are “I feel like and it feels like” instead of basing the opinions around real security law, fundamental mechanics of capital management, balance sheets, and mathematics to back up the “feel like” opinions

It’s hard to take anyone seriously when they spend 10 minutes crying over what Credit means and terminology used instead of the financial merits of the company and its operations

Also, preferred equity is 100% a product and anyone disagreeing with that is a midwit

The inability to recognize the parallels between a Bitcoin Treasury Company issuing preferred equity and an insurance company collecting premiums for a financial contract means the education and understanding is blinded by emotions and lacking the humility to accept you’re wrong

Kudos to Jeff for showing patience with someone grasping at straws and continuously melting down with little tirades when every jab is debunked succinctly

[Bitcoin News @BitcoinNewsCom]

“Is an insurance company a Ponzi scheme?”

Watch Jeff Walton put Coffeezilla’s brain in a pretzel.