It was known from prior reports that Epstein had a soft spot for bitcoin and people had reported that he funneled money into the MIT Media Lab, along with maintaining connections to the Digital Currency Initiative (DCI) at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).
Author and privacy advocate Aaron Day spotlighted these “sinister links” in a report tying Bitcoin and Epstein together in an article published in January 2024. The newest wave of documents reinforces these connections, with Bitcoin popping up frequently throughout the material. Courier Newsroom turned the entire cache into a searchable database, making it easy for anyone to dig up any word or topic with a quick tap.
The trove reveals that funding was sought by former MIT Media Lab Director Joichi Ito’s Digital Currency Initiative, and that Epstein had contributed money to Bitcoin Core developers indirectly through the program. The files include emails chatting about Bitcoin and developers, plus several articles on Bitcoin and blockchain that were forwarded to Epstein. Mentions of Bitcoin developers, the broader community, and the regulatory climate of the era also make several appearances.
Email from Epstein to former MIT Media Lab Director Joichi Ito. Source: U.S. House Oversight Committee data dump.
On social media, talk about Epstein’s bitcoin ties has been bouncing around even louder since the data dump dropped, with multiple news outlets highlighting specific email threads. The news has been trending on X for quite some time. Some argue that stitching Bitcoin to Epstein is a calculated psychological play designed to spark disgust and drag attention away from Bitcoin’s actual strengths.
Read more: Jeffrey Epstein Confidant Ghislaine Maxwell’s Rumored Last Reddit Post Was About Bitcoin
By welding it to the bleakest imagery imaginable, one observer said, the aim is to stir emotions, tilt public sentiment, and ultimately pry people away from their bitcoin. Others insist the Epstein angle is simply “mid-story contamination,” adding that Bitcoin already trudged through this mess in the past and “survived.” Others stated the whole thing was “old news,” saying the details have been common knowledge for ages. “This has been known for years,” Nic Carter wrote on X. “And the MIT DCI ≠ Bitcoin Core ≠ Bitcoin.”
Aaron Day, who published earlier findings on the topic, isn’t buying that dismissal and emphasized on X that even if the story isn’t new, it still deserves real answers. “Whether the news is old or not (and frankly no one was willing to confirm that Epstein directly funded it), it is not good news. This needs to be fully explained. Perhaps, I will do a podcast on it next week,” Day posted to X.
He added:
“DCI funded all 3 US CBDC pilots while funding the hobbling of Bitcoin. One of the Bitcoin core devs, Cory Fields, is a co-author on Project Hamilton (the US Retail CBDC pilot). I guarantee you that almost NO ONE knows this.”
For now, the Epstein discussions show no signs of cooling down on social media, with some calling the revelations a manufactured distraction while others view them as long overdue accountability. What’s clear is that the conversation has cracked open a fresh round of scrutiny over who shaped early crypto research and why. As more people revisit the details, the pressure grows for clarity, transparency, and a full accounting of how these relationships actually fit into Bitcoin’s history.
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。
