Written by: @HodlMaryland

Translated by: _DingDang (@XiaMiPP), Planet Daily

Editor’s Note: In the context of recent declines in Bitcoin prices, this article attempts to provide a more "structural" and conspiratorial perspective: perhaps the volatility of Bitcoin is not merely a reflection of market sentiment or liquidity changes, but rather a reflection of the deep game between two monetary systems within the United States. The author believes that Bitcoin is being drawn into the power conflict between the Treasury and the Federal Reserve, the stablecoin system and the banking system, the old financial order and the new digital currency architecture. Of course, this viewpoint is not the whole picture, but merely a deduction under the current macro narrative. We consider it a reference perspective, and there is nothing wrong with that. Perhaps behind the price, there are always deeper forces at play.

A struggle for monetary power is unfolding in public—yet almost no one is aware of the stakes involved. The following is my personal subjective interpretative reading.

In the past few months, a gradually clearer thread has emerged among politics, markets, and media. Disparate news suddenly connects, market anomalies no longer seem random, and institutional behavior exhibits rare aggressiveness. Beneath the surface, it seems that deeper changes are occurring.

This is not an ordinary monetary cycle.

This is not a traditional partisan struggle.

This is not so-called "market volatility."

What we are witnessing is a direct conflict between two competing monetary systems:

The old order… centered around JPMorgan, Wall Street, and the Federal Reserve.

And the new order… centered around a digital architecture anchored by government bonds, stablecoins, and Bitcoin.

This conflict is no longer just theoretical; it is happening, and it is accelerating. For the first time in decades, it has spilled into the public eye.

The following content attempts to depict the real battlefield… a battlefield that most analysts cannot see because they are still interpreting a world that is breaking through its old limitations using the frameworks of 1970–2010.

1. JPMorgan Steps Out of the Shadows

Most people see JPMorgan as a bank, which is a misunderstanding.

JPMorgan is the operational arm of the global financial system, the institution closest to the core mechanisms of the Federal Reserve, influencing global dollar settlements, and acting as the main executor of the traditional monetary framework.

So when Trump mentioned the Epstein network and explicitly named JPMorgan (rather than just individuals), it was not a rhetorical game. He pulled the most deeply embedded institution in the system into the narrative.

At the same time:

• JPMorgan is the main facilitator exerting strong short pressure on MicroStrategy ("MSTR"), precisely when the macro narrative of Bitcoin threatens old monetary interests.
• Some clients attempted to transfer MSTR shares out of JPMorgan but encountered delivery delays, suggesting potential custody pressures… such issues typically only arise when internal systems are under strain.
• JPMorgan is at the strategic core of the Federal Reserve ecosystem, both structurally and politically. Weakening its position is equivalent to weakening the old monetary system itself.

None of this is normal, but all of it is part of the same story.

2. The Government's Silent Shift: Reclaiming Monetary Power for the Treasury

While the media focuses on the noise of culture wars, the real strategic agenda is at the monetary level.

The government is quietly pushing to pull the center of currency issuance back to the U.S. Treasury, with specific measures including:

• Stablecoins deeply integrated with government bonds
• Programmable settlement rails
• Using Bitcoin as a long-term collateral asset

This shift is not a minor adjustment to the existing system but a replacement of the power core of the system.

Currently, the Federal Reserve and commercial banks (led by JPMorgan) almost monopolize all dollar issuance and circulation. If "Treasury + Stablecoins" becomes the core support for issuance and settlement, then the banking system will lose power, profits, and control.

JPMorgan is very aware of this. They understand what stablecoins mean. They also know what will happen once the Treasury becomes the issuer of "programmable dollars."

So they fight back—not through media rhetoric, but through market strategies:

• Derivative pressure
• Liquidity bottlenecks
• Narrative suppression
• Custody delays
• Political influence

This is not a policy dispute; it is a battle for survival.

3. Bitcoin: An Unintentional Battlefield

Bitcoin is not the target… it is the battlefield.

The U.S. government hopes to quietly accumulate Bitcoin strategically before clearly advancing a government bond-based digital settlement system. If announced too early, it would trigger a liquidity squeeze, driving Bitcoin prices up and increasing the cost of long-term accumulation.

The problem is that the old system is using mechanisms similar to suppressing gold trading to stifle Bitcoin signals:

• Oversaturation of derivatives
• Massive short positions
• Cognitive warfare
• Liquidity shocks at critical technical levels
• Creating custody bottlenecks at major prime brokers

JPMorgan's methods of suppressing the gold market have been honed over decades, and now these techniques are being replicated on Bitcoin.

The reason is not that Bitcoin directly threatens bank profitability, but rather that Bitcoin strengthens the future monetary architecture of the Treasury and weakens the monetary system of the Federal Reserve.

Thus, the government faces a difficult choice:

1. Allow JPMorgan to continue suppressing Bitcoin, enabling it to accumulate in a low price range.
2. Announce the strategy early, triggering a breakout in Bitcoin prices, but losing the opportunity to accumulate before the political situation stabilizes.

This is why the government remains silent on Bitcoin. It is not because they do not understand; it is because they understand too well.

4. Both Sides Are Fighting on a Fragile Foundation

This struggle is occurring on a monetary system that has been established for sixty years, which relies on:

• Financialization
• Structural leverage
• Suppressed interest rates
• Asset-driven growth
• Concentrated reserves
• Institutional oligopoly

Historical relevance is failing everywhere because the system itself is no longer coherent. Those traditional financial commentators who still view all of this as a "normal cycle" do not realize that the cycle itself is disintegrating.

The system is fracturing. The underlying structure is unstable. Incentives are diverging.

The old order of JPMorgan and the new order of the Treasury are both playing on the same fragile infrastructure. Any misjudgment could trigger a chain of turmoil.

This is why all actions appear so strange, chaotic, and urgent.

5. MSTR: The "Conversion Bridge" Under Direct Attack

Now let’s discuss a key aspect that most commentators overlook.

MicroStrategy (MSTR) is not an ordinary corporate Bitcoin holder. It has become a conversion mechanism—a bridge connecting old institutional capital with the emerging "Bitcoin-Treasury" monetary system.

MSTR's structure, leveraged Bitcoin strategy, and its preferred stock products essentially convert fiat currency, credit, and government bond assets into long-term Bitcoin exposure. Therefore, for institutions and retail investors who cannot (or do not wish to) hold physical Bitcoin directly but want to escape the suppressed yields under YCC (Yield Curve Control), MSTR has become a de facto entry point.

This means that if the government envisions a future where digital dollars issued by the Treasury coexist with Bitcoin reserves, then MSTR will be a key corporate node driving this transition.

And JPMorgan is well aware of this, so when JPMorgan:

• Facilitates strong short selling
• Creates delivery delays
• Suppresses MSTR liquidity
• Amplifies negative narratives

It is not attacking Michael Saylor; it is attacking the "conversion bridge" that enables the government’s long-term accumulation strategy to be realized.

There is even a possibility (still highly speculative, but the logic is strengthening): the U.S. government may intervene in the future, even making a strategic investment in MSTR. As recently suggested by (@joshmandell6):

• Infusing capital into MSTR in exchange for a stake in the company;
• Upgrading the credit rating of MSTR's preferred stock instruments, thereby enhancing their functionality within the system.

This move carries significant risks, both politically and financially, but it would send an undeniable signal to the world:

The U.S. is protecting key nodes in its emerging monetary architecture.

Just this possibility is enough to explain why JPMorgan has launched such a fierce attack.

6. Key Window: Control of the Federal Reserve Board

Next, time becomes very urgent.

As @caitlinlong recently pointed out: Trump needs to gain actual control over the governance of the Federal Reserve before Powell steps down. The current voting balance is unfavorable to him—he is about three to four votes behind in the board.

Multiple bottlenecks are emerging simultaneously:

• Lisa Cook's lawsuit against the Supreme Court could delay for months and postpone key personnel changes.
• The Federal Reserve board vote in February 2025 could solidify a hostile governance structure for a long time.
• The upcoming midterm elections, if the Republican Party performs poorly, will make it difficult for the government to reconfigure monetary power.

This is why economic growth momentum is crucial now, not six months later.

This is also the reason for the change in the Treasury's issuance strategy. This is why stablecoin regulation has suddenly become a core battleground. This is also why suppressing Bitcoin is so important. And why the battle surrounding MSTR is not a trivial issue, but a structural one.

If the government loses Congress, Trump will become a lame-duck president—unable to reshape the monetary system, instead bound by the institutions he tried to circumvent. By 2028, this window will be completely closed.

The time pressure is real.

7. A Broader Strategic Landscape

Looking from a distance, the entire pattern becomes clearer:

• JPMorgan is fighting a defensive battle, trying to maintain the global node centered around the Federal Reserve-bank system.
• The government is executing a covert monetary migration, reclaiming issuance rights for the Treasury, achieved through stablecoins and Bitcoin reserves.
• Bitcoin is the proxy battlefield, price suppression protects the old system, while covert accumulation empowers the new system.
• MSTR is the conversion bridge, the entry point threatening JPMorgan's capital flow dominance.
• Federal Reserve governance is the bottleneck, while political timing is the constraining factor.
• Everything is happening on an unstable monetary infrastructure, where any mistake could lead to unpredictable systemic consequences.

This is not just a financial story, nor is it merely a political story.

This is a monetary transformation on a civilizational scale. For the first time in sixty years, this conflict is no longer hidden.

8. Trump’s Layout

The government’s strategy is gradually taking shape:

• Let JPMorgan overreach in its suppression actions
• Quietly accumulate Bitcoin
• Protect and possibly strengthen the MSTR conversion bridge
• Rapidly reshape Federal Reserve governance
• Position the Treasury as the issuer of digital dollars
• Wait for the right geopolitical moment (possibly the "Mar-a-Lago Agreement") to announce the new structure

This is not a mild reform, but a complete reversal of the 1913 order—reclaiming monetary power from the financial system back to the political system.

If the gamble succeeds, the U.S. will enter a new monetary era based on transparency, digital rails, and a hybrid Bitcoin collateral framework.

If it fails, the old system will further entrench itself, and the next generation may not have another window for reform.

Regardless, this war has already begun.

Bitcoin is no longer just an asset… but a dividing line between two futures.

Yet both sides overlook one point: they will ultimately lose to absolute scarcity and mathematical truth.

As these two giants vie for control, be prepared for the unexpected and ensure the safety of your wallet.

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。