A staggering allegation has sent shockwaves through the crypto world: minutes before a sweeping U.S. tariff announcement, an enormous short position in Bitcoin was reportedly initiated—and then closed for an astounding $88 million gain.
The timing and lack of transparency have sparked controversy, prompting legal experts and market observers to call for a thorough investigation. One such voice, prominent pro‑XRP attorney John E. Deaton, has publicly urged an investigation into what may be more than just a volatile market outcome.
The Claim: Suspicious Timing and Huge Profit
The story first surfaced thanks to a post by crypto analyst Vivek Sen, who claimed that an account opened earlier that day locked in a colossal short position roughly 30 minutes before the Trump administration announced new tariffs.
The post included screenshots purporting to show the trade and its closure at peak profit. The magnitude and timing stirred widespread suspicion of privileged information or coordinated market action.
At the moment of the tariff revelation, the crypto market convulsed. Bitcoin plunged, triggering massive liquidations of leveraged positions—industry trackers estimate that over $19 billion worth of crypto positions were forcibly closed in a single day, including multibillion‑dollar waves within single hours.
If true, this needs to be investigated. https://t.co/8HDj3Qk6ap
— John E Deaton (@JohnEDeaton1) October 11, 2025
The conditions were ripe for a perfectly timed short: heavy cascading sells, thin liquidity at the margin, and panic trading. In that environment, the alleged $88 million shortcut would not be impossible—but it raises red flags.
John Deaton Weighs In
John E. Deaton, a lawyer known for his advocacy on behalf of XRP holders, reposted the claim and added: “If true, this needs to be investigated.” In saying so, Deaton elevated what could have remained an internet rumor into a matter of public interest — pushing market participants, exchanges, and regulators to take notice.
Deaton’s involvement is significant not only because of his legal standing but because he often frames crypto controversies in terms of fairness, transparency, and accountability. He has long expressed concerns about excessive regulation, unclear enforcement, and the need for clearer rules in cryptocurrency markets.
This latest statement suggests the short trade might be more than just speculation, potentially warranting official investigation.
Forensic Clues & Industry Reaction
Independent crypto investigatory groups and trading analytics teams have begun to examine on‑chain data, order book snapshots, and clearing records for telltale signs of manipulation.
We are on X, follow us to connect with us :- @TimesTabloid1
— TimesTabloid (@TimesTabloid1) June 15, 2025
Some experts highlight the trading account’s quick activation before the tariff announcement, concentrated derivative positions, and coordinated trades across instruments as signs that warrant further investigation.
Others are more cautious, pointing out that much of the evidence is circumstantial and that only exchange and platform records can verify counterparty identities and trade timing.
In the media, analysts emphasize that while extreme gains such as $88 million are within the realm of possibility under perfect conditions, they are exceedingly rare and typically accompanied by anomalies, including sudden liquidity gaps, abrupt order book shifts, and signs of front‑running or insider access.
The crypto space has long wrestled with questions of whether certain market actors enjoy informational advantages or privileged latency—this incident, if validated, would be a stark demonstration.
Implications & What Comes Next
If a credible investigation is launched, it could become a landmark case in crypto regulation and enforcement. Exchanges may be compelled to reveal timestamps, matching engines, and KYC logs. Regulators may come under pressure to increase oversight of derivatives platforms that were previously operating with little or no regulation.
Yet for now, the story remains unproven—and ideally, it should be treated as a serious allegation, not a confirmed fraud. Deaton’s public call underscores the need for transparency: the crypto community; both institutions and retail participants, deserves clarity about whether one trader, at least, stood with foreknowledge and capitalized while the rest were exposed to carnage.
Until that deeper review unfolds, observers should watch whether any credible entities respond: Do exchanges defend their systems? Will regulators open formal probes? Will on‑chain analysis converge toward a plausible searchable trail, or remain a web of hints and doubts? Whatever the outcome, this event is fast becoming a test case for accountability in a market whose rules are still evolving.
Disclaimer: This content is meant to inform and should not be considered financial advice. The views expressed in this article may include the author’s personal opinions and do not represent Times Tabloid’s opinion. Readers are urged to do in‑depth research before making any investment decisions. Any action taken by the reader is strictly at their own risk. Times Tabloid is not responsible for any financial losses.