After the Secret Meeting, Why Did Trump Aim His Fire at Banks?

比推Pubblicato 2026-03-05Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-03-05

Introduzione

President Trump met privately with Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong, after which he publicly criticized major banks on Truth Social. Trump accused the banks of trying to undermine the pro-crypto GENIUS Act and called for the advancement of the CLARITY Act, arguing that Americans should earn more from their money and that the crypto agenda should not be blocked. The meeting, first reported by Politico, occurred shortly before Trump's social media post, revealing a direct link between the private discussion and his public stance. The key legislative conflict involves a stalled crypto market structure bill. Banks warn that interest-bearing stablecoins could erode deposits and lending capacity, while crypto firms, including Coinbase, argue that the GENIUS Act rightly allows consumers to earn rewards from stablecoin holdings. JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon stated that stablecoin issuers paying interest should be regulated like banks, a claim countered by crypto advocates who emphasize that the GENIUS Act prohibits such issuers from lending or rehypothecating underlying funds. Following these developments, crypto-related stocks, including Coinbase (COIN), saw significant gains amid a broader market rally.

Author: CoinDesk

Compiled by: Deep Tide TechFlow

Original Title: Before Trump Slammed Banks, Coinbase CEO Had Just Met with Him Secretly

Deep Tide Introduction: CoinDesk exclusively confirmed a key timeline: Coinbase CEO Armstrong first met privately with Trump, after which Trump publicly criticized banks on Truth Social for obstructing crypto legislation.

This clue directly reveals the lobbying path behind Trump's statement, making the legislative battle between the crypto industry and the banking sector clearer.

Full Text Below:

Key Points:

Before publicly accusing banks of undermining the pro-crypto GENIUS Act and calling for the advancement of the CLARITY Act, Trump had a private meeting with Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong.
The meeting was first disclosed by Politico and occurred shortly before Trump posted on Truth Social, stating that banks "need to make a good deal with the crypto industry" to push forward stalled digital asset legislation on Capitol Hill.
The crypto market structure bill has stalled because banks warn that interest-bearing stablecoins could erode deposits and lending capacity, while crypto companies argue that the GENIUS Act reasonably allows consumers to earn rewards from stablecoin holdings.

CoinDesk confirmed that U.S. President Trump held a closed-door meeting with Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong, shortly after which Trump posted on Truth Social, stating that banks are trying to undermine the GENIUS Act.

"America needs market structure legislation done ASAP. Americans should be making more money from their money," Trump wrote in a post on Tuesday. "The big banks are making historic profits, and we won’t allow them to undermine our strong crypto agenda—if we don’t advance the CLARITY Act, all of this will go to China and other countries."

Politico first reported the meeting between Armstrong and Trump. Since then, Trump has publicly supported Coinbase's stance in the "ongoing lobbying battle with banks," a conflict that has stalled a major crypto bill.

The media cited "two people familiar with the matter" as sources, who spoke anonymously to discuss the closed-door event. The report also noted that it remains unclear what exactly the two discussed during the meeting.

However, the report reiterated that "the meeting took place shortly before Trump posted on social media, stating that banks 'need to make a good deal with the crypto industry,'" which is a key point in pushing forward the stalled digital asset legislation on Capitol Hill.

The White House and Coinbase did not respond to CoinDesk's requests for comment.

The market structure bill has been in limbo since the Senate Banking Committee originally scheduled a debate and vote. The core disagreement blocking the bill's passage is that banks believe stablecoin interest rates could impact bank deposits, thereby affecting their lending capacity; crypto exchanges argue that users should have the right to earn rewards from stablecoin holdings, which the GENIUS Act explicitly allows.

JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon said on Tuesday that stablecoin issuers paying interest on customer deposit balances should be regulated like banks. Patrick White, Executive Director of the Presidential Digital Asset Advisory Committee, countered this, stating, "What truly requires bank-like regulation is not the act of paying yields on balances itself, but the act of lending or rehypothecating the underlying dollars that make up the balances." White also noted that the GENIUS Act "explicitly prohibits stablecoin issuers from engaging in the latter. Stablecoins ≠ deposits."

Crypto-related stocks surged significantly on Wednesday amid a broad crypto market rebound, with COIN breaking above $200, reaching its highest price since late January.

Twitter: https://twitter.com/BitpushNewsCN

BitPush TG Discussion Group: https://t.me/BitPushCommunity

BitPush TG Subscription: https://t.me/bitpush

Original Link: https://www.bitpush.news/articles/7617080

Domande pertinenti

QWhat was the key sequence of events involving Trump and Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong?

ACoinbase CEO Brian Armstrong had a private meeting with Donald Trump, shortly after which Trump publicly criticized banks on Truth Social for obstructing the pro-crypto GENIUS Act and called for advancing the CLARITY Act.

QWhat is the main legislative conflict between banks and the crypto industry as described in the article?

ABanks warn that interest-bearing stablecoins could erode deposits and lending capacity, while crypto firms argue that the GENIUS Act reasonably allows consumers to earn rewards from stablecoin holdings.

QHow did Trump's public statement on Truth Social frame the issue between banks and the crypto industry?

ATrump stated that banks are trying to undermine the strong crypto agenda, that Americans should earn more from their money, and that without advancing the CLARITY Act, crypto innovation would move to China and other countries.

QWhat was Jamie Dimon's position on stablecoin regulation, and how was it countered?

AJamie Dimon argued that stablecoin issuers paying interest on customer deposits should be regulated like banks. Patrick White countered that the real need for bank-like regulation is not for paying yield on balances, but for lending or rehypothecating the underlying dollars, which the GENIUS Act explicitly prohibits.

QWhat was the market reaction following the news of Trump's meeting and statements?

ACrypto-related stocks, including COIN (Coinbase), saw significant gains, with COIN surpassing $200, reaching its highest price since late January, amid a broad crypto market rally.

Letture associate

Kalshi-CFTC Fight In New Mexico Could Shape Prediction Market Rules

A jurisdictional battle between the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and the state of New Mexico over the regulation of prediction markets could set national rules for the industry. At issue is who polices platforms like Kalshi, with the CFTC asserting federal oversight and New Mexico arguing state gaming and consumer protection laws apply, especially for contracts resembling wagers on events like elections or sports. The outcome will determine if prediction markets can scale nationally under a clear federal framework or face a fragmented, state-by-state regulatory landscape. This dispute is significant for the crypto-adjacent trading community, which often engages with these speculative event markets. A clearer rulebook could boost mainstream adoption, liquidity, and integration with crypto infrastructure, while a state-led challenge could stifle growth. The case is particularly sensitive for sports-related contracts, where the line between financial markets and gambling blurs. Ultimately, this legal fight will shape whether prediction markets become a scalable national product or remain constrained by jurisdictional conflicts.

bitcoinist31 min fa

Kalshi-CFTC Fight In New Mexico Could Shape Prediction Market Rules

bitcoinist31 min fa

The Value Distribution of Stablecoins

**Summary: The Value Distribution of Stablecoins** The article argues that stablecoins are evolving from mere trading tools into broader channels for dollar access. It divides the stablecoin ecosystem into four layers to analyze how value is distributed: 1. **Issuance Layer:** Mints stablecoins, holds reserve assets, and captures the spread between reserve yield and user costs (e.g., Tether, Circle). This layer currently earns the largest profit margin. 2. **Infrastructure Layer:** Connects stablecoins to the traditional financial system, handling fiat on/off-ramps, banking integration, compliance (KYC/AML), and asset management (e.g., Bridge, BVNK). This is the "unglamorous" but critical work, building the essential bridges between crypto and real-world finance. 3. **Acquiring/Distribution Layer:** Integrates stablecoins into merchant systems, manages payment flows, and provides enterprise financial software (e.g., Stripe, Coinbase). They act as the access point for businesses. 4. **Application Layer:** The end-users and businesses that ultimately use stablecoins for payments, settlements, or as a store of value. They benefit from convenience but have little pricing power. The core thesis is that while the issuance layer currently dominates profits, the often-overlooked **infrastructure layer holds significant long-term potential**. The real challenge and barrier to mass adoption is not the on-chain transfer of stablecoins (which is simple), but the complex "last mile" integration into existing business workflows, banking systems, and regulatory frameworks across different countries. Companies in this layer are currently in a "land grab" phase, investing heavily to build networks, secure bank partnerships, and establish compliance pathways. While their position is currently pressured by the profitable issuers above and distribution platforms below, the article suggests that if stablecoins become a default financial rail for businesses, the infrastructure providers who have done the hard work of integration will ultimately gain strong pricing power and become entrenched, essential players.

marsbit5 h fa

The Value Distribution of Stablecoins

The Value Distribution of Stablecoins The article argues that stablecoins are evolving from a mere trading tool into a broad "dollar channel." It analyzes the industry's value chain through four layers: 1. **Issuance Layer (e.g., Tether, Circle):** The top layer that mints stablecoins, holds reserve assets, and captures the thickest interest rate spread. 2. **Infrastructure Layer (e.g., Bridge, BVNK):** Connects stablecoins to the traditional financial system, handling critical but complex "dirty work" like fiat on/off-ramps, banking integration, compliance (KYC/AML), and cross-border settlement. 3. **Acquiring/Distribution Layer (e.g., Stripe, Coinbase):** Embeds stablecoins into merchant systems, manages payment flows, and integrates with enterprise software. 4. **Application Layer:** End-users and businesses that ultimately use stablecoins for payments, settlement, or storing value. The author posits that while the issuance layer currently captures the most profit, the most overlooked and potentially critical layer is infrastructure. The core challenge for stablecoin adoption isn't the on-chain transfer (which is simple), but bridging the gap between blockchain and the real-world financial system. This involves solving practical problems for businesses: fiat conversion, reconciliation, tax handling, and user onboarding. Infrastructure companies are currently in a difficult "land-grab" phase—building networks, securing banking relationships, and achieving compliance country-by-country. They face pressure from both the profitable issuance layer above and distribution platforms below. However, the author suggests this layer is building a crucial moat. Once stablecoins become a default business rail, the infrastructure players who have done the hard work of integration may gain significant, durable value and pricing power.

链捕手5 h fa

Why Is Nvidia Borrowing $20 Billion When It's Not Short of Cash?

Nvidia's recent announcement to issue at least $20 billion in senior notes, despite holding a strong cash position with over $48.6 billion in free cash flow last quarter, is not a sign of financial need. Instead, it represents a strategic move to leverage its high credit rating (recently upgraded to AA by S&P) to secure low-cost, long-term debt. This capital will support long-term AI infrastructure investments, data centers, R&D, supply chain prepayments, and strategic investments, while allowing the company to continue aggressive shareholder returns through stock buybacks and dividends. The decision reflects a mature capital management strategy: using debt to finance long-term growth assets is more efficient and less dilutive to shareholders than equity financing. It signals that Nvidia, like other tech giants (Alphabet, Meta, Amazon), is entering a new phase of heavy AI capital expenditure, shifting from a pure growth story to a story about capital allocation, credit strength, and long-term ecosystem positioning. The key question for investors is whether Nvidia can maintain its high cash flow generation and ensure that returns from these AI investments justify the cost of capital over the long term. The bond issuance amplifies its expansion capabilities but also ties its valuation more closely to the broader AI investment cycle's sustainability and profitability.

marsbit6 h fa

Why Is Nvidia Borrowing $20 Billion When It's Not Short of Cash?

marsbit6 h fa

Liberland Fires Tech Secretary After Alleged Blockchain And Website Takeover Attempt

Liberland's congress has voted to remove Technology Secretary Dorian Stern Vukotić, following a resolution accusing him of attempting to hijack the Liberland.org domain, removing administrative multisig protections, blocking the president from voting, and launching unauthorized tokens. The incident serves as a case study in blockchain governance, highlighting risks that go beyond smart contracts to include control over domains, admin keys, and off-chain authority. For the crypto industry, it underscores the need to scrutinize decentralization claims against operational realities, where a small group can still compromise governance. The story reflects a broader market shift where infrastructure security and governance are becoming as critical as price action. Editorial framing should treat the development as a verified information signal about governance risks, avoiding overstatement of Liberland's legal status and leaving room for follow-up evidence.

bitcoinist6 h fa

Liberland Fires Tech Secretary After Alleged Blockchain And Website Takeover Attempt

bitcoinist6 h fa

Trading

Spot

Futures