First, let me tell you a fact that most people don’t know

The U.S. government has those 328,000-plus bitcoins

Not a single one was bought

They’re all seized via investigations—drug dealers caught, darknet items one by one confiscated and handed over

This figure was first disclosed this May by White House digital asset adviser Witt: 328,372 bitcoins, then worth about $25.4 billion

Then over the past couple of days, Trump has been making remarks

At the White House, he met with crypto executives and said the U.S. is considering “large-scale” purchases of Bitcoin

Treasury Secretary Bessent also floated the idea of increasing holdings; the market is excited

But I want to break down this news into three layers for you to see

Sentiment, budget, law—those are three separate things.

-

First layer: sentiment/positioning.

The president said this is real. The will might also be real.

But in the U.S. system, the president doesn’t have one thing.

wallet

The first article of the Constitution is crystal clear: the power of appropriations lies with Congress.

The president can call out any number—every single cent has to be approved by Congress.

Second layer: the budget.

That executive order from last March establishing strategic reserves hides four words inside it.

budget-neutral

Translate it: you can increase holdings, but you’re not allowed to spend new money.

Those four words are essentially a self-incriminating statement.

I want to buy, but I don’t have the budget.

So the reserves were built over a year and a half. The way they’re increasing holdings is still through forfeiture—not purchases.

Third layer: the law.

What truly allows the government to spend money to buy coins is legislation passed by Congress.

The BITCOIN Act that Lummis wanted to buy one million coins was blocked.

To this day, the three related bills are still lying in Congress.

Not a single one passed.

Let me show you another piece of a “talking points” record.

In August 2025, Bessent went on TV and said the U.S. “won’t buy” Bitcoin. The market blew up that day. He then backtracked on the spot and said they would explore budget-neutral pathways to increase holdings.

April 2026: a White House advisor said, “There’ll be a big announcement in a few weeks.”

Now it’s August. Where’s the announcement? There isn’t one.

During the ensuing audits, they also found that each agency’s cold wallets were scattered in office desk drawers. The holdings of the police department were stolen—over $60 million.

-

So the correct way to read this news is:

The call is real, but between “wanting to buy” and “being able to buy,” there’s the entire Congress.

What you’re seeing is just an expression of sentiment.

What gives you a buy order is the appropriations.

This isn’t to say the news is meaningless.

On the direction/trajectory: when a government keeps repeatedly expressing “wanting to increase holdings,” it already changes the narrative background of that asset itself.

But in terms of positioning, you have to distinguish clearly what you’re actually trading.

Is it his words, or his money?

-

And here’s another little-known fact.

in Washington

The person who talks doesn’t control the money; the person who controls the money doesn’t talk 🙂