The newly released Epstein documents contain important insider information related to Bitcoin and the broader cryptocurrency industry. In our previous article, “Drawing Through the Epstein Files: Discovering He Met Satoshi Nakamoto,” we provided a comprehensive review.
This time, we will explain the “Bitcoin hijacking theory”, which is once again attracting attention due to the Epstein documents.
The “Bitcoin hijack theory” comes from Roger Ver’s 2024 book “Bitcoin Hijack: The Hidden History of BTC.” This is the first time that he has systematically elaborated on the “Bitcoin hijacking theory” using a book title and a full-length manuscript.
The “Bitcoin hijack theory” argues that Bitcoin was originally intended as a “peer-to-peer electronic cash” system designed to counter the hegemony of fiat currencies, but has morphed into speculative “digital gold.” This transformation is not only a departure from the original mission assigned to Bitcoin by Satoshi Nakamoto, but also the result of multiple conspiracies: internal commercial interests, external funds such as Epstein, and the US government’s efforts to maintain the dollar’s dominance. In other words, “Bitcoin’s development was neither natural nor organic.” It was supposed to be a currency that people around the world could freely choose to use, but it ended up being dominated by the narrative of digital gold as a store of value. ”
Roger Ver argues that Bitcoin Core developers’ decisions are not independent and are influenced by external funding. From 2014 to 2015, Bitcoin Core developers were no longer able to earn a steady salary due to the collapse of the Bitcoin Foundation. At that point, the MIT Media Lab’s Digital Currency Initiative (DCI) began compensating several Bitcoin core developers. As a result, three Bitcoin Core developers (Gavin Andresen, Vladimir van der Laan, and Corey Fields) decided to join the MIT Media Lab.
This information has resurfaced as a hot topic with the recent revelations of the Epstein dossier, but it was already public knowledge in 2019 when MIT admitted to receiving donations from Epstein. Roger Ver cited this in his book as evidence that outside funding was influencing Bitcoin’s development, but developers who received funding from MIT were unaware that the donation came from Epstein.
He also noted that Blockstream, led by another Bitcoin Core developer, Adam Back, has received venture capital funding from companies such as a16z. Mainnet congestion benefited the company’s business model, and commercial interests further contributed to what Ver calls the “hijacking” of Bitcoin, providing a narrative around sidechains and Bitcoin Layer 2 solutions.
During the “block size wars,” Bitcoin Core developers insisted on smaller blocks and rejected various scaling proposals. They publicly advocated and pursued full blocks, high fees, and transaction congestion, considering this the “natural state of market competition.” They believed that block rewards could eventually be replaced as an incentive for miners to maintain the security of the network in the long term.
However, Roger Ver believes that this ultimately led to the slow, expensive and unreliable nature of Bitcoin transactions, preventing its widespread adoption as a global currency and everyday payment tool. He envisions Bitcoin becoming truly pervasive in people’s daily lives, such as buying coffee, buying clothes, and attending sporting events.
If the blocks were always full, it would be as ridiculous as Starbucks intentionally selling out of its coffee every day. Blockspace is a consumer product, and miners must meet the actual usage demands of Bitcoin.
He also pointed out that the small block size limit has forced Bitcoin to rely on solutions like custodial wallets and the Lightning Network. Bitcoin has become a payment layer rather than electronic money. Additionally, they end up forcing users to rely on centralized services, whether it’s a custodial wallet or a Bitcoin sidechain/layer 2 solution.
Big block proponents have lost the “block size war.” Roger Ver moved to BCH, which was later split into BSV and XEC. But did small bloc supporters really “win”? At the time, they believed that as blocks grew, the cost of running a complete Bitcoin node would rise, making it unaffordable to the average person, and that the right to verify Bitcoin would be controlled by governments, mining pools, large corporations, and data centers.
But years later, government influence over Bitcoin continues to grow. The path envisioned at the time, where payments move slowly while prioritizing decentralization, has not developed as ideally. Companies like Valve, Stripe, Dell, and Expedia once supported Bitcoin payments directly (without converting to fiat payments), but eventually stopped doing so due to long transaction times, high fees, or low user adoption.
Few people today talk about Bitcoin’s potential as a global currency. The digital gold narrative has become mainstream.
He also cited U.S. government intervention, citing the NSA’s 1996 paper “How to Create a Mint: Encrypting Anonymous Electronic Cash” as evidence, and noting that U.S. intelligence agencies were interested in similar technology even before Bitcoin was created. The paper describes an anonymous digital currency system similar to Bitcoin, which he believes indicates the U.S. government may have been monitoring or trying to influence Bitcoin’s development from its early stages to prevent it from truly threatening the country’s monetary system.
In a 2024 interview, he further stated:
In 2011, we already knew that the CIA was interested in Bitcoin. The CIA was contacting Bitcoin developers and asking for Bitcoin-related information. At the time, most people had never even heard of Bitcoin, but the CIA was already researching it.
However, around 2012, an alleged member of the intelligence community who identified himself as “John Dylan” reportedly spent more than $10,000 (a significant amount) creating promotional content that attempted to mislead people into believing that keeping Bitcoin’s blocks small would make the network more decentralized. This claim is completely untrue and goes against the original design intent of Bitcoin’s creator, Satoshi Nakamoto. Bitcoin’s early design philosophy and usage patterns were not like this. At first, no one believed these claims.
The Bitcoin community was then subjected to a massive wave of censorship. Anonymous individuals took control of all major Bitcoin discussion platforms overnight, and anything that advocated using Bitcoin as a currency was banned. They censored anyone trying to promote Bitcoin for payment purposes. Initially, people were able to see through these tricks, but as new users joined, they were indoctrinated with the censored ideology.
Roger Ver, an influential evangelist and builder from the early days of the cryptocurrency industry, began investing in Bitcoin in early 2011. He is the founder of Bitcoin.com, co-founder of Ripple and Blockchain.com, and a seed investor in Kraken. In the early days, he actively promoted Bitcoin and related cryptocurrency ventures. He was already a billionaire before investing in Bitcoin, and even sold his Lamborghini to buy more Bitcoin. As a result, he earned the nickname “Bitcoin Jesus.”
However, since the “Block Size Wars”, he has consistently criticized small block proponents, Bitcoin Core developers, and Blockstream while supporting Bitcoin Cash (BCH). As a result, opinions about him within the Bitcoin community were almost entirely derisive, with comments such as: BCH is the real hijack of Bitcoin. ”
It wasn’t until 2024, when he published his new book, that he first combined various elements, including the block size wars, Epstein’s funding of Bitcoin Core developers, the NSA paper, and the possibility of US government censorship of large block advocacy, into a comprehensive “Bitcoin hijack theory.”
About three weeks after the book was published, he was arrested in Spain on suspicion of tax evasion, and the United States subsequently requested his extradition. The U.S. Department of Justice charged him with failing to report the sale of approximately $240 million worth of Bitcoin in 2017 (resulting in a loss of at least $48 million to the IRS), underreporting the value of his Bitcoin assets when he renounced his U.S. citizenship in 2014, and eight counts including mail fraud, tax evasion, and false tax reporting, which carry a maximum sentence of 109 years in prison.
In a subsequent interview, Roger Ver claimed that he was targeted to expose “the truth about the Bitcoin hijacking” and the US government’s role in it. In reality, however, the charges against him were filed several months before the book’s publication, and were only made public and enforced after it was published.
In October 2025, he reached a deferred prosecution agreement with the U.S. Department of Justice, paying approximately $49.9 million (taxes, penalties, and interest), and the case was subsequently dismissed.
In summary, despite his position (supporting Large Block and BCH), there is no direct evidence that his arrest was for “revealing that the U.S. government intentionally downgraded Bitcoin from a currency to a speculative asset in order to maintain the dominance of the dollar.” Nevertheless, he continues to advocate his views despite misconceptions and attacks from the Bitcoin community, and his contribution to Bitcoin’s early development cannot be erased. More importantly, his argument that “Bitcoin has deviated from its original position, and as a result, the value of Bitcoin itself has decreased,” received great acclaim.
PayPal co-founder Peter Thiel made it clear in an interview last year that Bitcoin has strayed from its original purpose of decentralization and system resistance. It is no longer a revolutionary tool against the old order, but has been “adopted” by the old order and become part of the system. Peter Thiel noted that FBI agents have previously said they would prefer criminals to use Bitcoin over dollars, suggesting that Bitcoin failed to achieve the anonymity and censorship resistance it was supposed to, and instead became a tool that was easier to track. Although Bitcoin ETFs brought incremental growth to the market, it did not mean that traditional finance would bow to cryptocurrencies. On the contrary, Bitcoin was “adopted” by traditional finance. Free technology aimed at destroying fiat currencies eventually became just a mainstream financial product.
The latest major disclosures from the Epstein files have caused a cognitive and intellectual shock. This information was previously inaccessible and unimaginable, so when it was finally revealed, shocked and stunned people reacted with a “rebound” effect, expanding the scope of their imagination.
Roger Ver’s claim that “Bitcoin has been hijacked” has once again gained attention and is now considered prescient. @miyaspokeofthis connects the death of Nikolai Mushezian (co-founder of MakerDAO and lead developer of WETH) with Epstein, Brock Pierce (co-founder of Tether), and the “Bitcoin hijack theory” and weaves it all into a comprehensive article.
I hesitate to call all of this a “conspiracy theory.” Because when a glimpse of evil suddenly becomes apparent, no one can convince themselves that human nature is essentially good and that there should be no more doubts about it.