# The crypto industry lost. > Source: > Published: 2026-08-03 17:49:34+00:00 The media keeps pushing this narrative that the crypto industry “won” or “bought out” democracy, despite every shred of evidence showing otherwise. For example, Richard Hanania [wrote](https://www.richardhanania.com/p/why-the-tech-right-failed), “The crypto industry is taking regulatory capture to new heights.” Yeah, like no Bitcoin reserve. [No CLARITY Act](https://fortune.com/2026/07/24/hopes-for-key-crypto-bill-fade-amid-delays-trump-ethics-controversy/). But bailouts and other initiatives for AI and other sectors and companies (e.g. semiconductors, metals, quantum computing, Intel, Dell Computers, etc.) which donated nothing to Trump’s campaign. It’s an interesting definition of “winning” or “regulatory capture,” if it’s defined to mean getting nothing you wanted. Sounds more like losing. Crypto spent more than any other industry to back Trump, and got nothing to show for it. No strategic Bitcoin reserve. No [CLARITY Act](https://fortune.com/2026/07/24/hopes-for-key-crypto-bill-fade-amid-delays-trump-ethics-controversy/). The CLARITY Act was the crypto industry’s top legislative priority for over a year, but it stalled again. Polymarket now puts the [odds](https://polymarket.com/event/clarity-act-signed-into-law-in-2026) of its 2026 passage at only 27-31%, down from a peak of 82% back in February 2026. Recall in 2024-2025 everyone was 100%-certain crypto would be the standout or biggest winner of the Trump administration. As I correctly predicted, it turned out to be the biggest loser, whereas AI and “big tech” won. Indeed, Bitcoin is the worst performing asset since Trump won. Shares of MicroStrategy and Coinbase, whose CEOs backed Trump, are also down significantly over the past year. Bitcoin has erased its post-inauguration gains. Same for the [failure](https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2026/08/03/bernstein-sees-another-leg-lower-for-crypto-markets-if-clarity-act-stalls) to pass the CLARITY Act. This is exactly as I [predicted](https://greyenlightenment.com/2026/06/03/why-human-behavior-is-not-as-unpredictable-random-as-assumed/) in 2024 and early 2025. And also, I’m profiting by [betting](https://greyenlightenment.com/2026/05/24/profiting-from-iran-and-polymarket/) “no” on Strait of Hurmuz traffic returning to normal and the prolonging of the Iran war. From my [post](https://greyenlightenment.com/2026/05/13/the-importance-of-having-an-information-advantage-at-trading/), “The importance of having an information advantage at trading,” I explain my thesis for shorting Bitcoin: My information advantage was in 2024 and early 2025 knowing that Trump would abandon support for Bitcoin, and that he would fail to live up to donor’s and investor’s expectations. The assumption was he would waste no time enacting a Bitcoin reserve and use federal funds to buy Bitcoin to fund it. Neither of those happened, but also hasn’t talked about Bitcoin ever. Bitcoin had surged from $60k in mid 2024 after he won–to as high as $126k on hope–which has evaporated. And to add salt to the wound: the CLARITY Act didn’t die because lobbying failed. It died because Trump himself has [pulled in over $2 billion from “shitcoins” and crypto deals](https://fortune.com/2026/07/24/hopes-for-key-crypto-bill-fade-amid-delays-trump-ethics-controversy/), which made the whole thing politically radioactive. Democrats turned his personal profiteering into the wedge issue that killed the bill his own donors paid for. Meanwhile, sectors that donated nothing got direct capital (e.g. bailouts), not mere promises of legislation. The government now holds [equity stakes in 30 companies worth $26.7 billion](https://fortune.com/2026/07/26/the-u-s-government-invested-27-billion-in-corporate-stakes-good-luck-finding-them/) in sectors as diverse as semiconductors, quantum computing, steel, or rare earth metals. [Intel alone got a stake now worth $40 billion](https://www.marketplace.org/story/2026/07/24/hows-the-intel-deal-working-out-for-the-trump-administration/), converted from unpaid CHIPS Act grants. None of that money followed campaign contributions—those who donated nothing got the most. Save for Elon Musk, “big tech” CEOs didn’t even support Trump until AFTER he had won, when it was safe to do so. Trump could have announced a direct investment in MicroStrategy, Bitcoin, or Bitcoin miners, but understandably didn’t. As I said before, this would have invited cries–deservedly so–of corruption, or of “bailing out gamblers and speculators.” Intel, by contrast, is an iconic American brand, so there was no comparable objection to bailing it out. Voters can see the value of semiconductors, AI, or quantum computing far more clearly than they can see the value of crypto, which has no purpose except enriching hackers and criminals, as the recent $89 million Coldcard breach showed. So if “winning” means getting what you paid for, crypto is 0-for-2 on its biggest hopes, and the one guy who did cash in was Trump–not the donors, not the investors, not the industry. That’s not “democracy for sale,” but the “system” pushing back. Overall, we can clearly see that crypto has not “won”. Donors paid hundreds of millions of dollars in what seemed as a surefire bet, only to get empty promises and poor performance in return. This should restore Hanania’s faith in the system that only Trump is allowed to profit from crypto–not donors, investors, or the crypto industry.