Digital Asset News host covers a four-star admiral's confirmation that the US military is running a Bitcoin node
Digital Asset News host discusses a US military admiral's public confirmation of a Bitcoin node, Scott Bessent's comments on digital asset legislation, and stablecoin payment volume data.
Summary
The Digital Asset News host opens with market commentary — Bitcoin is approaching $80,000, with nearly $370 million in leveraged short positions liquidated in the prior 24 hours. The main focus of the episode is a clip of four-star Admiral Samuel Paparo confirming before a congressional committee that US Indo-Pacific Command is currently operating a node on the Bitcoin network for monitoring and operational testing purposes, framing Bitcoin's value to the military as a computer science and network security tool rather than a financial one. The host also plays a clip of Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent arguing that the Clarity Act is critical for establishing the US as the global leader in digital asset payments and preserving dollar reserve currency primacy. The episode closes with stablecoin transaction volume data showing Tron and Ethereum dominating payment rails, and a Q&A session covering topics including Arbitrum, the Lightning Network, and the host's personal investment strategy.
Key Takeaways
FULL TRANSCRIPT
Market Overview and Bitcoin Price Action
Host: Hello everybody, welcome to the live stream. So it looks like the US government is running a Bitcoin node, and I did not have that on my bingo card.
Before we get into that — and we actually get confirmation from a four-star admiral — I have to tell you yesterday was an odd day. We had talked about the Russell 2000, about how it's a smaller market cap and it was kind of flashing that we were getting ready for something big. During that stream we dropped like a percentage point across the board, and of course that was because of the Trump post which came out — it looks like there were some additional problems going on in Iran and the peace talks. But then it seems like it doesn't really matter, because the market today is doing extremely well across the board.
Bitcoin is now above $79,000 and it's on its way potentially to almost $80,000. We'll see if it actually holds up. But yeah, it was an interesting day yesterday. We were doing this show and things were starting to drop because of what was happening. That's what happens when you have a post like that. But things across the board are looking pretty good today. Ethereum is up, XRP — everything's up. These are the days you love to see.
If you're going long on some things, this is a great day. If you're dollar-cost averaging like myself and you're waiting for the upside, this is great. But if you went short, this isn't a great day. And if you went short with leverage, that's up to you. I'm not your dad. You do whatever you want to do. I'm not a big fan of it, but this is what's happening.
In the last 24 hours, we have almost half a billion dollars — or $370 million — wiped out from the market as leverage plays get squashed. Of course, these are the shorts, and that's just how the market goes. We have some good days, some bad days, and whatever you guys want to do is up to you. I'm just happy we are at where we're at right now.
Admiral Paparo Confirms US Military Bitcoin Node
And I've got to tell you, this first piece here was pretty interesting. This is four-star Admiral Samuel Paparo, and he's going to explain — there are two things I want to go over first. It's not just about the node and the government running a Bitcoin node, which I again didn't see coming. The question is: why? Why is the US government interested in Bitcoin? What is going on?
This is about a minute or so. This is Mr. Moorhouse asking the question in committee.
Mr. Moorhouse: Admiral Paparo, yesterday you testified that Bitcoin held potential as a tool for national security. Recent research from the Bitcoin Policy Institute estimates China has approximately 194,000 bitcoins while the United States has approximately 328,000 bitcoins. In this era of digital competition, would it be to our strategic advantage to maintain a lead in this regard, as we do with other strategic resources like gold and oil?
Admiral Paparo: Sir, our interest in Bitcoin is as a tool of cryptography — a blockchain and reusable proof of work — as an additional tool to secure networks and to project power. I think this protocol is here to stay. I think the computer science of it has direct implications for the projection of power — not financial, but from a computer science standpoint, from the securing of networks. And so I am supportive of those applications. All instruments of national power are important, but from the military application standpoint, my interest in Bitcoin is as a computer science tool, as projection of power.
Host: Projection of power, store of value, peer-to-peer transactions — I don't care what they say. As long as they're into it, I'm into it. That sounds great.
And again, the reason why I continue to dollar-cost average Bitcoin is because the US government will continue to debase the currency and they will continue to print. And since they're going to keep doing that, I'm going to invest in the things that you cannot debase — which would be Bitcoin, and only 21 million.
US vs. China: Bitcoin and Gold Holdings
Now, on the question of whether the US can keep up with China — first of all, I don't know where Mr. Moorhouse is getting his numbers. I'm taking a look at the bitbo.io treasuries. The USA might have 300-plus thousand Bitcoin, but that's not what's stated there. We can see that China has about 194,000 and the United States is just edging them out at 198,000. So this 300,000-plus figure that he's talking about — I hope that's true, but from what I understand, as far as what has actually been seized and what is actually in the possession of the US government, I don't believe it is that high so far. But hey, we'll see if it all pans out, and maybe at some point the government actually gets into buying more Bitcoin.
As far as gold goes — I've invested a little bit into precious metals like gold and silver, mostly in my Roth IRA, and it's done pretty well for me. I think it's something we shouldn't overlook. The precious metals guys and us — we all want the same thing, right? Debasing a currency, getting to the hardest asset. It just depends on how you get there.
As far as top gold-producing countries, China is crushing it and they are the number one leader. The United States does not produce that much gold. And we can see that the People's Bank of China has been purchasing gold pretty feverishly. That's the reason why we've seen such a massive influx of cash into gold over the last 6 to 12 months.
However, we still have the most. Sorry for being a homer for America, but as far as financially goes, the United States still holds the most amount of gold. I'm still waiting for that audit from Fort Knox, but so far, as far as tonnes go, we've got 8,133 tonnes as of 2025. Germany is the next closest at 3,350. Italy, France, Russia — China is all the way down to 2,304. So we still have the most amount of gold and we still control a lot of that section.
And just as a side note — I invest in gold because it's a speculative asset. That's pretty much what it is. I know people will say, "No, no, no, we're using it for tech and industry." Peter Schiff will tell you it's for rockets and space technology. But no — if you break down what gold is actually used for, investment is almost half, people just speculating. ETFs — that's it. Central banks, like we just talked about, that's 15 to 20%. So right there you're at 65%. Jewelry fabrication accounts for most of the rest. That's like 93 to 94% of everything we do with gold. So, gold people, I get your whole argument with tech and industry, but let's be serious — it's not that much.
And lastly, if you can visually represent the amount of gold that is above ground, it's like a seven-story building, 72 feet by 72 feet. Again, I just wanted to bring that to everybody's attention: if you're going to invest in something, know what you're investing in.
Admiral Paparo Confirms the Bitcoin Node
Anyhow, now let's get to the good stuff. This is where Paparo says, "Yeah, we've got a node." Take a listen.
Congressional questioner: What worldwide digital assets forward authorities and resources does Indo-Pacific Command need to address as respects the national security dimensions of digital assets?
Admiral Paparo: Presently we're in experimentation, so I'll give you a deeper look into that. Presently we have a node on the Bitcoin network right now. We're not mining Bitcoin — we're using it to monitor, and we're doing a number of operational tests to secure and protect networks using the Bitcoin protocol.
Congressional questioner: I appreciate that, Admiral. Thank you.
Host: Great. So there you go. If anybody's asking whether that's really true — yes, it's really true. It's already been verified by a four-star admiral that yes, they are running a node.
This will definitely help address the question that some people have raised — the idea that this is somehow a CIA operation for Bitcoin. Now everybody can point to the public congressional record. As a reminder, here's what some people have asked: "The moment people recognize that this is a CIA operation, people won't put their money into blockchain. People won't put their money into Bitcoin. They'll be like, why would I do that? You have to ask yourself this question — where are the blockchain servers located? The US Navy."
Anyhow, let me think about that in the comments section.
Scott Bessent on the Clarity Act and Digital Asset Payments
And lastly, let's take a listen to Scott Bessent as he talks about how important it is for the Clarity Act to pass. I personally don't think it's going to happen, but I've been wrong many a time. The question is: why is the Clarity Act so important, and what is the use case for digital assets? And hint, hint — it's payments. Take a listen.
Congressional questioner: Can you talk about why it's so important that Congress pass digital asset legislation?
Scott Bessent: Senator, when the United States leads in best practices, safety, and soundness in the financial world — whether it's our banking system, our securities, or now digital assets — it's important for the US to lead for several reasons. One, US leadership over the long term secures the primacy of the dollar as the reserve currency. Two, our best practices will emanate to the rest of the world, because what had happened is digital assets were in dark, unregulated places. They will come into the US and we will be able to use our anti-money laundering and KYC frameworks and have a much better handle on digital assets — both for payment. And I think this is going to be a very important payment rail. The US has to lead here. We are the technological leader in the world. We should be the payments leader in the world.
Host: Payments. Who has been talking about that? A lot of the time it is government. A lot of the time it is institutions and corporations. But it is what it is. And payments are going to be a big thing. We've talked about this many a time.
Stablecoin Volume and the Best Payment Blockchains
I still believe in the best — and those are Binance, Ethereum, Solana, and Tron — but I think I'm wrong on one of these, and I'm going to show you where I'm wrong.
The best comes from where the transactions are actually being done with stablecoins. Visa is tracking this for us because they're concerned about who's eating their lunch. In the last 30 days, it's $10.3 trillion in transaction volume for stablecoins.
The question is: what are the big stablecoins? It is Tether and USDC by far. The others are not a joke, but they're way, way far behind. USDC is $882 billion. Tether is $591 billion. The next closest is USDG — I don't even know what that is — at $878 million. Then Ripple Labs at $800 million. USDH at $181 million. There's a big difference between $882 billion, $591 billion, and a couple hundred million.
So which blockchains are the best? Over the last 12 months it was Binance, Ethereum, Solana, and Tron on Tether and USDC. But if we take off the laggards — which would be Binance and Base, with only $984 billion — this is USD volume over 12 months. You've got $1.88 trillion on Ethereum, $1.9 trillion on Solana, $3.3 trillion on Tron, and $3.7 trillion on Ethereum over the last 12 months.
But if we zoom in a little bit to the last three months, Binance is dropping off — and guess who takes Binance's spot? Base. So it's still the best, but one you can't invest in. That's Coinbase's essentially layer-2, which is Base. And if we zoom in even further to the one-month view, we can see that Base is taking over Binance for that number four spot. So again, I still think it's the best, but I can't invest into Base, so I don't really care. Binance might be on its way out — because who really trusts Binance anymore, especially with what's going on?
If you take a look at Ethereum, Solana, and Tron over the last year or so, Solana has been down about 39%. Over the last 14 days, up 6% — that's great for Solana. Bitcoin, actually not that great over a year — down 13%. But 30 days and 14 days? Okay, you got me — 12% and 10.4%.
But if we take a look at Tron — I know it's crazy to think about, given Justin Sun and everything — but over a year, up 33%. Up 7% over 30 days. 14 days, 3.5%. 7 days, 0.3%. Last 24 hours, down a little bit. Last hour, flat. Again, taking a look at the broad spectrum, Tron's looking pretty reasonably good, and that's why I dollar-cost average these things.
Q&A Session
Host: Let's get into a little Q&A and answer all your questions.
Joseph Crypto says: "Who really trusts Justin Sun and Tron? Remember, it's decentralized and it's trustless, just like Arbitrum layer-2 solution." Well, there was the wallet freezing situation — we talked about this. Was it yesterday? I think it was yesterday, maybe today. But yeah, that happened. Look, I'm not here to debate decentralization versus centralization. There is a council on Arbitrum — 12 people — and they're the ones that decided to freeze those accounts. Nine out of 12, so whatever. Hey, 12 people is pretty decentralized.
Sparrow Hawk says: "Sell Bitcoin at $82K and buy back in lower." I'm not really good at that. Some people are better at it — like Ivan on Tech and CTO Larson, they're real good at calling some overblown tops. Me, I'm not that great at it. I just kind of take profits. I think around this time I need to take some profits, and I probably will on some of these alts — Binance, Ethereum, Solana, Tron, and maybe even a little Bitcoin — because things have been going pretty good.
I've been buying since — granted I was buying at like $100K, $98K, $96K — but then as everything moved down I kept buying every Monday. So I'd hit like $61K, $68K, whatever it was. And now we're coming up to $80K. So there should be a reason to take some off the table for me, because historically speaking, it's not a really great year in mid-term years. And there's that old saying: sell in May and go away. So who knows? Maybe this is a question I'll ask Guy and Ben tomorrow on the show.
If you guys have questions for Guy and Ben — we'll do the show tomorrow — put those in the comments section and I'll ask them.
Kraken pays 4.25% on the stablecoin USDG. That's pretty good. No wonder the banks are up in arms over stablecoin yield — they don't want to lose out. There's no reason, if you think about it — I have a great bank, USAA. I've been with them since I went into the military. They're great. But a lot of these banks just kind of suck, especially for gaining yield. So it really comes down to: what do you believe in? Do you believe in a bank that's got FDIC insurance and is backed by the full faith of the government? Great. Or do you like these new neo-banks that are coming, that have stablecoins backed one-to-one with treasuries or dollars? Which one would you trust more — the one that's 100% backed, or the one that's got fractional reserve? It just depends. I would like the other one, especially if I can get some big fat yields like that.
Someone says: "Up 8% but down 95%." Hold on — it can't be. Well, it can be. It is crypto, right? Arbitrum. Look, it's up 41% in 30 days. That's pretty good. But let's take a look at the max. Oh man, that is awful. $2.26 was the high. Diamond hands, bro. Diamond hands. Just hold that all the way down and then feel good here. The reason I'm making fun of diamond hands is because it reminds you of rule number five: take profits. But if you bought in the last 30 days, don't pay attention to the all-time high up there. 30 days is pretty good.
You know, I was not going to invest into the MicroStrategy Strife until I watched that video with Coffeezilla, and he was just railing on it and railing on it. We did a video called the Four Horsemen of FUD, and I did my research on it. Strife looks pretty reasonable. So I'm going to take a little risk and I'm buying every week via Robinhood.
The Lightning Network and Peer-to-Peer Bitcoin Payments
Jeff Leopard asks: "Whatever happened to peer-to-peer transactions?" Jeff, you know, peer-to-peer transactions — it's a good question. Whatever happened to peer-to-peer transactions with Bitcoin and the Lightning Network? It seemed to work pretty well for Steak 'n Shake — that's a nationwide fast food chain. They're accepting Bitcoin and they said it's worked out really well for them. It just seems like nobody wants to use their Bitcoin for peer-to-peer transactions, even if it is Lightning.
I think it kind of goes back to the gap between what you think the technology is going to be and what it actually is. I always use the example of iron ore. When man first discovered iron ore, they had no idea it could be used for skyscrapers — nobody knew what a skyscraper was. They could use it for flints, shields, armor, that type of thing. But then moving forward to use it for buildings and construction — no one really got that at first, and that's what we use it for now. Nobody uses it for a flint or an arrowhead anymore. Well, I guess some people do. Depends on the arrowhead.
Someone says: "Ease of use — Lightning sucks." I've never really used it extensively. I paid for things in Bitcoin a couple of times, but as far as Lightning payments specifically, it seemed relatively easy when I tried it. Maybe it's how the whole setup works. Again, it really comes down to retail. They have to not understand what's going on under the hood. It's the same thing with the internet. Back in the late '80s and early '90s, when it was difficult to go on the internet — you had to have a CD with the AOL little guy on it. You'd put it into the CD drive and it would go boom boom boom boom, and then you'd go on the internet. And it would take you like five minutes to download a picture. That was a pain. And now of course everything is super fast and nobody knows how it works in the background. And that's the point.
Steo says: "I would like to thank the admiral for pumping my bags." It's a coordinated effort, but thank God for the people in government who aren't insiders screwing us over.