“For most people, the biggest investment, their nest egg, is their home equity. Find a way to transform that into some kind of bitcoin exposure to a larger or to a smaller degree,” he said. “So then you can bet on the asset of the house appreciating, the house asset appreciating, and the bitcoin asset appreciating.”

Salinas points to bitcoin’s long-term appreciation relative to real estate as evidence for his view. In January 2016, the price of bitcoin hovered around $400. A house in Central London sold for an average price of $1.6 million or 4,000 bitcoin. With home prices remaining basically unchanged ten years later, that same purchase would require less than 30 bitcoin.

For Salinas, that comparison illustrates why he believes bitcoin outperforms traditional stores of value such as real estate over the long term.

“It’s an asymmetrical bet to the upside,” he said. “The more people find out about bitcoin, the more demand there will be.”

The ‘fiat fraud’

Salinas, who has emerged as a potential presidential candidate in Mexico for the 2030 election, traces his deep belief in fiat devaluation to a time long before digital currency even existed. Back when then-President Richard Nixon severed the U.S. dollar’s direct convertibility into gold, ending the gold standard.

TLDR:

• The Fed voted 12-0 to hold rates at 3.5–3.75%, but raised inflation forecasts and slowed its rate-cut outlook.
• Bitcoin fell 2.2% to $64,150 while Ether dropped 3.6%, with XRP and Solana each losing around 3%.
• The GMCI 30 dropped 2.6%, pushing its year-to-date decline to nearly 36% across the broader market.
• Warsh ditched Powell’s forward-guidance style, opting for shorter, fact-based statements with no market direction.

Crypto markets retreated Wednesday after the Federal Reserve held interest rates steady but delivered a hawkish policy outlook.

The Federal Open Market Committee voted 12-0 to maintain its target rate at 3.5% to 3.75%. The decision came during Kevin Warsh’s first meeting as Fed chair.

Updated projections pointed to slower rate cuts ahead, rattling risk assets across the board. Bitcoin, Ether, and several altcoins fell between 1% and 3% following the announcement.

Markets React to a Hawkish Policy Signal

Bitcoin traded near $64,206 as of writing, down roughly 2.54% over the prior 24 hours. Ether shed 2.8%, while XRP and Solana each declined around 3% according to CoinGecko data. Hyperliquid’s HYPE token, which hit a new all-time high just a day earlier, pulled back 1.5% to $72.

The GMCI 30, tracking the 30 largest cryptocurrencies by market cap, dropped roughly 2.6%. That move extended its year-to-date decline to nearly 36%. Traditional safe-haven assets weren’t spared either, with gold sliding 2.2% and silver shedding a sharper 4%.

Matt Mena, senior crypto research strategist at 21Shares, framed the broader picture: “Taken together, the picture is one of a crypto market absorbing a hawkish macro backdrop while rotation and genuine demand continue to surface in the strongest names.”

The rate hold itself was broadly anticipated and mostly priced in before the meeting. What caught markets off guard was the tone of the updated Summary of Economic Projections, which flagged persistent inflation concerns despite easing geopolitical tensions and softer energy prices.

Warsh Charts a New Course for Fed Communication

Wednesday’s meeting marked more than just a rate decision—it offered the first look at Warsh’s communication style as chair.

His policy statement was notably shorter than those issued under former chair Jerome Powell. It also dropped the forward-guidance language that Powell used consistently throughout his tenure.

Warsh described the new format as focused on presenting “the facts” rather than steering market expectations. That approach aligns with his long-standing skepticism toward forward guidance, which he has argued ties the Fed’s hands unnecessarily.

Mena addressed the weight of the occasion directly: “The Fed’s decision to hold rates was fully expected, but it carried unusual weight as the first meeting chaired by Kevin Warsh.”

He added that “the real signal came from the updated projections,” pointing to revised forecasts that suggest policymakers remain wary of inflation pressures despite some easing on the energy front.

The committee’s updated dot plot marked a meaningful shift from March projections. Policymakers now see a slower path toward lower rates than they did just three months ago.

That pivot, combined with Warsh’s leaner communication style, set a more cautious tone for markets heading into the second half of 2026.

Audits are accomplishing exactly what they are designed to do — discovering errors in the code. And they’re working. Fewer attacks than before take advantage of faulty code to steal platform funds.

The problem, however, is that we’re seeing a growing disconnect between what audits examine and what attackers actually exploit. Today, the industry’s largest losses don’t actually originate from traditional smart contract vulnerabilities. Rather, they come from compromised private keys, governance manipulation, insider compromise, malicious dependency updates and operational failures.

As brilliant as they are at identifying code vulnerabilities, traditional audits cannot prevent a developer from falling victim to a phishing campaign. The best code in the world can still sit atop vulnerable operational infrastructure.

In fact, our research shows that, when measured by financial damage, these operational exploits are often far more devastating than code vulnerabilities themselves. The industry has invested enormous resources into reducing smart contract risk, but the costliest attack vectors remain comparatively under-defended. It’s like the industry is still focused on defending against the last generation of attacks, whereas malicious actors have moved on to different strategies.

Audits alone create a dangerous illusion of safety

Platforms frequently advertise the number of audits they have completed, the reputation of the firms they hired, or the volume of findings identified during review. These have become shorthand indicators for whether a project is safe.

Moody’s Ratings is rolling out its credit ratings to Solana (SOL), allowing issuers of tokenized bonds and other fixed-income securities to embed the firm’s assessments directly into blockchain-based assets.

The move, announced Wednesday in partnership with Solana-focused tokenization specialist Alphaledger, expands Moody’s Token Integration Engine (TIE) to a major public blockchain after its first deployment earlier this year on the institutional-focused Canton Network (CC).

The move builds on a pilot project completed last year, when they demonstrated how municipal bond ratings could be attached directly to tokenized securities on Solana.

Tokenization — the process of creating blockchain-based versions of traditional assets — has become one of the fastest-growing areas of finance. Asset managers including BlackRock, Franklin Templeton and Apollo have launched tokenized funds and credit products, while Boston Consulting Group and Ripple estimate the market could reach $18.9 trillion by 2033.

As tokenization gains traction, financial firms are increasingly focused on bringing the infrastructure surrounding traditional assets onto blockchain rails. That includes ownership records, pricing data, compliance information and credit ratings.

Barry Moore won the Republican primary runoff for Alabama’s U.S. Senate seat on Tuesday, defeating Democrat Everett Wess by securing 55.8% of the vote, according to NBC News. The race became necessary after neither candidate received a majority in the May 19 contest. Moore is set to take the seat held by outgoing Republican Senator Tommy Tuberville, in a development that is drawing heightened attention from the crypto political ecosystem.

Federal Election Commission (FEC) disclosures indicate that pro-crypto political committees backed by Fairshake—an advocacy group associated with cryptocurrency companies—spent more than $12 million on media and advertising to support Moore across the May 19 primary and the Tuesday runoff. Compliance-focused observers are likely to see the election as another example of how crypto-aligned political spending is scaling in U.S. federal contests, raising questions about transparency, regulatory oversight, and cross-border policy alignment.

Key takeaways

• Moore won the Alabama Republican Senate runoff against Everett Wess with 55.8% of the vote, according to NBC News.
• FEC filings show Defend American Jobs PAC—affiliated with Fairshake—spent more than $12 million on media and ads for Moore.
• Advocacy organization Stand With Crypto rated Moore “strongly supports crypto” based on public statements and his voting record in Alabama’s 1st Congressional district.
• Fairshake-related committees may have spent over $40 million across multiple states to support candidates described as “pro-crypto,” according to a Fairshake spokesperson’s remarks reported in the coverage.

FEC-backed crypto political spending in the Alabama runoff

The Alabama Senate runoff is the latest instance of large-dollar involvement by industry-aligned political committees. In this case, FEC reports attribute more than $12 million in media and ad spending to Defend American Jobs PAC, which is described as affiliated with Fairshake, during the May 19 primary and the subsequent runoff.

For institutional compliance and governance teams, the practical significance lies in the mechanics of political spending: FEC reporting requirements create a documented paper trail, but the broader network of affiliated committees and advocacy groups can complicate attribution and risk assessment. Analysts monitoring policy exposure may also view such disclosures as an early indicator of how crypto industry stakeholders anticipate legislative priorities in the next congressional session.

Cointelegraph reported that Stand With Crypto assessed Moore as “strongly supports crypto,” citing public statements and his voting record. That rating matters in compliance terms because it signals how industry groups evaluate candidates not only for their rhetoric, but for recorded legislative behavior—an approach that can inform risk frameworks for regulated entities interacting with government counterparts.

Fairshake’s scale and the “pro-crypto” strategy

Fairshake spokesperson Geoff Vetter said that the committee’s “biggest spend of the cycle” helped deliver another candidate characterized as a “pro-innovation champion,” and referenced nearly $150 million in cash available for future efforts. The statement, as reported in the coverage, also suggests an intention to expand pro-crypto legislative influence via what the spokesperson framed as a sizable “pro-crypto caucus.”

While political messaging is not itself regulatory conduct, large-scale campaign activity is often examined by policymakers and enforcement agencies in broader discussions about lobbying, political influence, and disclosure. For regulated crypto firms, the governance question is whether political engagement aligns with internal compliance expectations around transparency, conflicts of interest, and reputational risk.

Beyond Alabama, the same reporting describes Fairshake and related affiliates as potentially spending more than $40 million across several states to back candidates they consider favorable to crypto policy goals. According to the article, Defend American Jobs PAC reported holding a $193 million war chest as of January. Even without drawing conclusions about intent, such figures underscore why election-related spending is increasingly treated as a compliance and policy monitoring matter rather than a purely political story.

Industry PAC activity across multiple states

The Alabama runoff follows a pattern of multi-state, pre-general-election spending by crypto-aligned committees, including in states with scheduled primaries before the November election. The coverage notes that industry PAC spending has been visible in upcoming contests in South Carolina, Texas, California, South Dakota, and New Jersey.

In addition to Defend American Jobs PAC, the reporting highlights Protect Progress—described as a Fairshake affiliate—as having reported media buys for House-related races. Specifically, it referenced FEC disclosures for spending tied to Maryland Democrat Adrian Boafo and New York Democrat Ritchie Torres ahead of primaries set for June 23.

From a regulatory perspective, these disclosures matter because they may affect how compliance teams map political influence into policy outcomes—particularly around areas central to crypto regulation such as stablecoin frameworks, exchange oversight, market structure, and AML/KYC expectations. In the U.S., these issues span the SEC’s remit, the CFTC’s commodity and derivatives authority, and DOJ enforcement priorities, while in Europe, the MiCA framework continues to shape cross-border compliance strategies for issuers and service providers.

Institutional observers may also treat this as a reminder that U.S. political dynamics can affect timelines for implementation and rulemaking—even when the formal rulemaking process is independent. Large political spending may contribute to a favorable legislative environment, but uncertainty remains as to how quickly, and in what form, policy changes would be translated into enforceable regulatory requirements.

What happens next before the November election

With additional primaries scheduled for next week, the Alabama outcome is likely to feed into broader attention on crypto-aligned political strategy. Further FEC filings may offer clearer visibility into how affiliated committees allocate resources and how those allocations correspond to candidate positions on crypto policy.

For compliance monitoring, the key near-term focus should be on subsequent disclosure updates, candidate policy commitments, and any legislative momentum that could impact enforcement posture or regulatory priorities—particularly as lawmakers in the next Congress weigh areas ranging from campaign-finance related scrutiny to the regulation of digital asset markets.