18+ Content Warning

By clicking Enter, you confirm you are 18 years of age or older and agree to comply with all applicable local, state, and federal laws.

Notice: Any content or member activity - including anything you may buy, sell, transfer, or discuss - must comply with current and upcoming laws.

Members are encouraged to stay informed: California Firearm Laws: 2026 Outlook & 2025 Recap . Responsibility for compliance rests solely with the individual member.

caguns.net

Welcome to CAguns.net!
Join our growing community where you can ask questions, share knowledge, or browse our classifieds section.

Sign up for a free account today and unlock full access! Once registered, you can search, post, and take advantage of exclusive features unavailable to guests.

A note on why more of the site now requires an account: automated scrapers and AI systems have been crawling our forums and classifieds at a scale. Requiring sign-in for those sections is the most effective tool we have. It takes a minute to register, it's free, and it keeps what happens here between actual members.

New to California gun ownership or trying to keep up with the changing laws? Check out our sister site CA2A.com — free courses, plain-English legal updates, and step-by-step guides built for California owners.

Advanced features are available only to registered members. Register today!

Nearly a Million Investors Lost a Total of $3.8 Billion on Trump Crypto Coin

Nearly a Million Investors Lost a Total of $3.8 Billion on Trump Crypto Coin



A report from a cryptocurrency analytics firm details how those who bought the Trump memecoin have fared, with most retail investors having lost money while sophisticated traders did better.

An up-to-date tally of Trump followers turned crypto investors is in. And for them, the overall results are remarkably bad.

Nearly 1 million people who bought President Trump’s memecoin have lost money through the end of June, according to a report by the cryptocurrency analytics firm Nansen. Their losses total $3.81 billion.

The analytics firm’s assessment was calculated this week after Mr. Trump signed an annual financial disclosure showing that he walked away with a $636 million payout on the same crypto bet, part of a haul of at least $2.2 billion from all of his business ventures in 2025.

The odds were always in his favor. Mr. Trump profited whether the price of his memecoin went up or down. He collected returns whenever anyone traded the tokens, as he repeatedly pushed his followers to do, using his Truth Social account to promote the coin.

Once a crypto skeptic, Mr. Trump embraced the profit-making opportunity of digital currencies in 2024, while he was running for president. He and his sons founded a crypto start-up called World Liberty Financial, which soon began selling a coin called $WLFI that has also declined sharply.

Three days before his inauguration, Mr. Trump unveiled a second Trump-branded investment — the $TRUMP memecoin, a type of novelty currency with little practical value.
“It’s time to celebrate everything we stand for: WINNING!” Mr. Trump wrote on social media. “Join my very special Trump community. GET YOUR $TRUMP NOW!” But that turned out to be bad advice.

Most crypto transactions are publicly visible, recorded on a digital ledger called the blockchain. That allows analysts to trace purchases of digital coins from individual crypto accounts, known as wallets. Nansen’s data shows that, as of the end of June, 988,905 buyers of the $TRUMP memecoin have lost money, representing roughly two out of every three buyers.

Cumulatively, these 988,905 wallets have lost a total of $3.81 billion, including buyers who have held on to their stash and recorded paper losses, according to Nansen. The coin was trading at $1.76 as of Friday, down 97 percent from its peak price of $75.35.

Nicholas Pinto is among the losers. A frequent crypto trader who voted for Mr. Trump in 2024, Mr. Pinto said he invested a total of roughly $500,000 in the $TRUMP coin, and has now lost about half that investment.

“He is leveraging the power of being president to launch currencies, when he seems trustworthy in the public’s eye,” Mr. Pinto said in an interview. “It is kind of incredible. It is almost a legal scam.”

The White House this past week rejected any suggestion that Mr. Trump has cashed in at the expense of his followers. Since arriving at the White House, Mr. Trump and appointees have curtailed regulatory oversight of the industry, including policies related to memecoins.

“President Trump proudly made the United States the crypto capital of the world,” Anna Kelly, a White House spokeswoman, said in a statement to The New York Times after Mr. Trump’s annual report was made public on Tuesday. “All actions by President Trump and his administration are taken in the best interest of the American people.”

A representative for the $TRUMP memecoin venture did not respond to a request for comment. David Wachsman, a spokesman for World Liberty, blamed the plummeting value of $WLFI on broader market conditions that have forced down the prices of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies.

“No one can control the markets,” he said. “World Liberty stands behind the governance token WLFI, which has had increasing utility in a growing ecosystem since day one.”

Mr. Trump was not the only winner on the $TRUMP coin. After it launched, its price surged from less than $1 to more than $70, creating a window of opportunity for sophisticated crypto traders to extract a big profit.

These advanced traders, often using automated programs to purchase digital currencies, know that memecoins often skyrocket quickly in value and then crash, as the early buyers sell their holdings to less sophisticated, slower-moving investors hoping to get in on the action.

A little under 500,000 crypto wallets have recorded profits from $TRUMP, totaling $4 billion, according to Nansen. But that figure “reflects a small number of early buyers capturing enormous gains while the broad retail majority absorbed the losses,” the report said.

The memecoin was only one of several crypto ventures that reeled in profits for Mr. Trump and his allies.

Mr. Trump’s total profits from World Liberty reached $799 million last year, according to his financial disclosure, including hundreds of millions from the United Arab Emirates, which secretly moved in early 2025 to buy nearly half the company. A Trump business entity also collected a 75 percent cut of sales of $WLFI, after the deduction of certain expenses, guaranteeing that Mr. Trump would profit, even if the coin’s price ultimately crashed.

The losses on World Liberty’s coin are more complicated to track. Initially, the company sold the coin directly to investors, at prices of either $0.015 or $0.05, according to Nansen.

Anyone who bought the coin at $0.05 has made a slight profit, Nansen found. But $WLFI did not become widely available until September, when it started trading on secondary markets, known as exchanges.

Those transactions are not all publicly traceable. Of the 26,663 wallets that Nansen tracked, 85 percent have recorded a loss. The total losses amount to $83 million, compared to $23 million in profits.

But that is likely just a tiny cut of the overall losses — as the others buyers purchased the coins on exchanges whose data is not publicly visible. Today, World Liberty’s coin trades at $0.057, down 82 percent since September.

Despite the cratering prices, Mr. Trump has faced few consequences from his ventures, because federal regulators have largely abandoned crypto enforcement.

Stephen Gillers, a New York University law and legal ethics professor, said he would not be surprised if Mr. Trump and his partners eventually face a class-action lawsuit from followers who lost money — even though the Securities and Exchange Commission announced in February 2025 that it will no longer scrutinize memecoin deals.

The $TRUMP memecoin site had warned buyers that they should not see the token as an investment vehicle. “Trump Memes are intended to function as an expression of support for, and engagement with, the ideals and beliefs embodied by the symbol ‘$TRUMP’ and the associated artwork, and are not intended to be, or to be the subject of, an investment opportunity,” the website says.

But Mr. Gillers said that this disclosure is likely not enough to curb future legal challenges, even if they have to wait until after Mr. Trump leaves office.

“Trump back when he was a real estate developer boasted that he plays ‘to people’s fantasies,’” Mr. Gillers said. “Here he seems to have encouraged supporters to invest with the expectation they could anticipate riches — even as he himself was cashing out.”
 
🤦🏻 welcome to democracy

The United States is not a democracy. The USA is a constitutional republic where citizens democratically elect representatives who are supposed to be bound by the constitution. When that design collapses as it is in the process of doing, when a president can blatantly ignore the constitution, weaponize the justice department and subvert the other two branches of government not to mention elections, as is happening under Trump, then we rapidly become an authoritarian state. In this case we have become a 🥔, kleptocracy and near dictatorship.
 
The United States is not a democracy. The USA is a constitutional republic where citizens democratically elect representatives who are supposed to be bound by the constitution. When that design collapses as it is in the process of doing, when a president can blatantly ignore the constitution, weaponize the justice department and subvert the other two branches of government not to mention elections, as is happening under Trump, then we rapidly become an authoritarian state. In this case we have become a 🥔, kleptocracy and near dictatorship.
Hahaha.

He said “weapons the justice dept”.

*insert Mara Lago raid topic here*

-dale
 
Hahaha.

He said “weapons the justice dept”.

*insert Mara Lago raid topic here*

-dale

The former president had massive amounts of classified information scattered around Mar-a-Lago where virtually any one could access it.

The August 2022 search of the Mar-a-Lago estate was authorized by a federal judge. U.S. Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart approved the search warrant after the Department of Justice and FBI presented evidence establishing probable cause that a crime had occurred.

That is called due process and not a weaponization of the Justice department. If Trump had not been re-elected, he would be in prison right now for that and his culpability in the 6 January 2021 insurrection. If he doesn't die first, he will be prosecuted for both crimes when he is out of office.
 
The former president had massive amounts of classified information scattered around Mar-a-Lago where virtually any one could access it.

The August 2022 search of the Mar-a-Lago estate was authorized by a federal judge. U.S. Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart approved the search warrant after the Department of Justice and FBI presented evidence establishing probable cause that a crime had occurred.

That is called due process and not a weaponization of the Justice department. If Trump had not been re-elected, he would be in prison right now for that and his culpability in the 6 January 2021 insurrection. If he doesn't die first, he will be prosecuted for both crimes when he is out of office.

Here we go….it was only a matter of time. Pathetic. The inevitability of talking to a liberal. Every….single….time. January 6th!!! ….Russia!!! ….Racist….pedophile….its so typical.

I was giving you the benefit of the doubt as you were simply misinformed but now I know you really are just dumb.

Let me explain something to you about the government and politicians…..nobody will go to jail, nothing will happen. Doesn’t matter which aisle you sit on. If you actually think this guy is going to sit in jail at any point of his life because the Democrats “got him this time!”, you really are more of an idiot than previously thought. Hoping it happens …..fine. But encourage you to keep it to yourself, you look very stupid.

Not going to happen dude. Oh whoops, not to assume your identity. I know how you people get upset when others do that. Apologies

-dale
 
The United States is not a democracy. The USA is a constitutional republic where citizens democratically elect representatives who are supposed to be bound by the constitution. When that design collapses as it is in the process of doing, when a president can blatantly ignore the constitution, weaponize the justice department and subvert the other two branches of government not to mention elections, as is happening under Trump, then we rapidly become an authoritarian state. In this case we have become a 🥔, kleptocracy and near dictatorship.
I'll entertain your wild claims, don't know why.

Yes we are not a DIRECT democracy, however the President not being on your political side doesn't make it tyranny.

Ignore the constitution how?

weaponize the justice department how?

Everthing sounds grandiose but falls apart under critical inspection
 
I'll entertain your wild claims, don't know why.

Yes we are not a DIRECT democracy, however the President not being on your political side doesn't make it tyranny.

Ignore the constitution how?

weaponize the justice department how?

Everthing sounds grandiose but falls apart under critical inspection

Are your questions in earnest or will you simply dismiss every example I provide? When you ask questions but first say the claims are wild and grandiose, it would appear you are less than objective.
 
Are your questions in earnest or will you simply dismiss every example I provide? When you ask questions but first say the claims are wild and grandiose, it would appear you are less than objective.
I’m just keeping us grounded in reality. If you think you can prove your points go ahead :)
 
I’m just keeping us grounded in reality. If you think you can prove your points go ahead :)

Examples are in no particular order and by no means are these the only examples.

1. Ignoring, disregarding and violating the constitution.

A. The 14th Amendment: The Birthright Citizenship Executive Order. On his first day in office, Trump signed an executive order attempting to end birthright citizenship for the U.S.-born children of undocumented immigrants.

B. Article I (Separation of Powers): Unilateral Tariffs via National Emergencies. The administration frequently utilized emergency declarations to implement broad economic policies, notably invoking the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 (IEEPA) to bypass Congress and enact sweeping tariffs. The Constitutional Issue: Under Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, the power to regulate foreign commerce and lay tariffs is explicitly reserved for Congress. The Outcome: In Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, the Supreme Court ruled against the administration, holding that the executive branch could not declare a national emergency as a loophole to seize tax and tariff powers reserved exclusively for the legislature.

C. The 5th Amendment: Due Process in Mass Deportations. The administration's rapid enforcement tactics, specifically using the centuries-old Alien Enemies Act to accelerate mass deportations drew heavy legal fire. The 5th Amendment’s Due Process Clause applies to all persons within the U.S., guaranteeing legal proceedings before deprivation of liberty or deportation. Lower courts and advocates argued that bypassing immigration hearings to expel individuals violated this bedrock principle.The Outcome: The Supreme Court ultimately ruled that individuals must be allowed due process and a legal pathway to challenge their removals under the Act. Furthermore, federal judges stepped in to mandate due process compliance for individuals detained or transferred under these sweeping operations.

D. The 1st Amendment, Freedom of Speech and Retaliatory Enforcement. Civil liberties groups filed numerous actions accusing the administration of weaponizing federal agency power to suppress political dissent. The 1st Amendment strictly prohibits the government from engaging in viewpoint discrimination or punishing protected speech. Key legal challenges arose when the administration used immigration enforcement to detain international students and scholars who engaged in pro-Palestinian political speech, claiming their rhetoric threatened U.S. foreign policy. Additionally, intense backlash occurred when Federal Communications Commission (FCC) leadership publicly threatened the broadcast licenses of networks hosting late-night hosts critical of the president.

E. F. G. etc, The domestic emoluments clause, (Article II, Section 1, Clause 7). Florida land deal. $230 million payoff from the DoJ. The Foreign Emoluments clause (Article I, Section 9, Clause 8), Financial disclosures and reporting from his second term have revealed billions in revenue stemming from international real estate ventures and newly established cryptocurrency businesses, prompting ethics watchdogs to argue that foreign governments are buying influence through these commercial channels. etc. etc. etc.

All of the above represent outright violations of the constitution. It's not even debatable. If you throw out red herrings such as, "they all do it" or "what about Obama" or if you resort to personal attacks, I will know you cannot defend your position.
 
So
Examples are in no particular order and by no means are these the only examples.

1. Ignoring, disregarding and violating the constitution.

A. The 14th Amendment: The Birthright Citizenship Executive Order. On his first day in office, Trump signed an executive order attempting to end birthright citizenship for the U.S.-born children of undocumented immigrants.

B. Article I (Separation of Powers): Unilateral Tariffs via National Emergencies. The administration frequently utilized emergency declarations to implement broad economic policies, notably invoking the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 (IEEPA) to bypass Congress and enact sweeping tariffs. The Constitutional Issue: Under Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, the power to regulate foreign commerce and lay tariffs is explicitly reserved for Congress. The Outcome: In Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, the Supreme Court ruled against the administration, holding that the executive branch could not declare a national emergency as a loophole to seize tax and tariff powers reserved exclusively for the legislature.

C. The 5th Amendment: Due Process in Mass Deportations. The administration's rapid enforcement tactics, specifically using the centuries-old Alien Enemies Act to accelerate mass deportations drew heavy legal fire. The 5th Amendment’s Due Process Clause applies to all persons within the U.S., guaranteeing legal proceedings before deprivation of liberty or deportation. Lower courts and advocates argued that bypassing immigration hearings to expel individuals violated this bedrock principle.The Outcome: The Supreme Court ultimately ruled that individuals must be allowed due process and a legal pathway to challenge their removals under the Act. Furthermore, federal judges stepped in to mandate due process compliance for individuals detained or transferred under these sweeping operations.

D. The 1st Amendment, Freedom of Speech and Retaliatory Enforcement. Civil liberties groups filed numerous actions accusing the administration of weaponizing federal agency power to suppress political dissent. The 1st Amendment strictly prohibits the government from engaging in viewpoint discrimination or punishing protected speech. Key legal challenges arose when the administration used immigration enforcement to detain international students and scholars who engaged in pro-Palestinian political speech, claiming their rhetoric threatened U.S. foreign policy. Additionally, intense backlash occurred when Federal Communications Commission (FCC) leadership publicly threatened the broadcast licenses of networks hosting late-night hosts critical of the president.

E. F. G. etc, The domestic emoluments clause, (Article II, Section 1, Clause 7). Florida land deal. $230 million payoff from the DoJ. The Foreign Emoluments clause (Article I, Section 9, Clause 8), Financial disclosures and reporting from his second term have revealed billions in revenue stemming from international real estate ventures and newly established cryptocurrency businesses, prompting ethics watchdogs to argue that foreign governments are buying influence through these commercial channels. etc. etc. etc.

All of the above represent outright violations of the constitution. It's not even debatable. If you throw out red herrings such as, "they all do it" or "what about Obama" or if you resort to personal attacks, I will know you cannot defend your position.
sounds like checks and balances at play and the government working as intended. Now if they ignored the Supreme Court ruling, you might have something there.

Terrorist support groups don’t get to espouse their ideas, they can leave here.

Hopefully Congress can pass a law ending birthright citizenship so we can be like Europe.
 
So

sounds like checks and balances at play and the government working as intended. Now if they ignored the Supreme Court ruling, you might have something there.

Terrorist support groups don’t get to espouse their ideas, they can leave here.

Hopefully Congress can pass a law ending birthright citizenship so we can be like Europe.

Not really checks and balances as much as it is a president who is INTENTIONALLY violating the constitution and doing so until someone stops him.

That's like saying it's OK to rob banks until you are caught and stopped. That is not how the law or our constitution works.

I would be happy to provide you with a book that explains the basics of how the constitution and congress actually work, if you would read said book?

In the case of Birthright citizenship, it is ingrained in the 14th amendment without ambiguity. Congress and the executive can pass and sign anything they want, that doesn't mean it is constitutional. Congress CANNOT overturn the 14th amendment without the nation passing another amendment that nullifies the 14th.

This is exactly how it worked with prohibition, the 18th amendment implemented a ban on the manufacture, sale, and transportation of alcohol in 1919 and the 21st amendment repealed that ban in 1933.

As for "terrorist" groups. Who defines what a terrorist group is? The government does. Trump has tried to declare that democrats are terrorists however, the first amendment does not prohibit any individual or group from "espousing" their ideas. That's why we have white supremacists and neo-🥨s roaming the streets wearing masks and carrying tiki torches. It's also why we have people who protest again Trump, his extrajudicial killings, his corruption and his support of the genocide by Israel in Gaza and his war of aggression against Iran.

We all get to say what we want and we don't have to leave just because you don't like what we say.
 
Not really checks and balances as much as it is a president who is INTENTIONALLY violating the constitution and doing so until someone stops him.

That's like saying it's OK to rob banks until you are caught and stopped. That is not how the law or our constitution works.

I would be happy to provide you with a book that explains the basics of how the constitution and congress actually work, if you would read said book?

In the case of Birthright citizenship, it is ingrained in the 14th amendment without ambiguity. Congress and the executive can pass and sign anything they want, that doesn't mean it is constitutional. Congress CANNOT overturn the 14th amendment without the nation passing another amendment that nullifies the 14th.

This is exactly how it worked with prohibition, the 18th amendment implemented a ban on the manufacture, sale, and transportation of alcohol in 1919 and the 21st amendment repealed that ban in 1933.

As for "terrorist" groups. Who defines what a terrorist group is? The government does. Trump has tried to declare that democrats are terrorists however, the first amendment does not prohibit any individual or group from "espousing" their ideas. That's why we have white supremacists and neo-🥨s roaming the streets wearing masks and carrying tiki torches. It's also why we have people who protest again Trump, his extrajudicial killings, his corruption and his support of the genocide by Israel in Gaza and his war of aggression against Iran.

We all get to say what we want and we don't have to leave just because you don't like what we say.
The SLPC funded fed groups? lol
 
Spongebob Squarepants Popcorn GIF
 
SLPC?? WTF is that?

I suspected you would retreat under cover of some BS or other rather than debating the facts.
What fact are you referring to? Your claim that the judicial branch checked the executive branch on their power = tyranny?

We have tons of democrat written unconstitutional laws in CA, so is CA a tyrannical government by your own logic?

Yeah it’s kinda well known that group you mentioned is a fed group lol
 
What fact are you referring to? Your claim that the judicial branch checked the executive branch on their power = tyranny?

We have tons of democrat written unconstitutional laws in CA, so is CA a tyrannical government by your own logic?

Yeah it’s kinda well known that group you mentioned is a fed group lol

Okay, I now understand the challenge here. Sad.
 
Back
Top Bottom