Epstein's dossier reveals a "secret battle" between the Bitcoin maximalist camp and Ripple + Stellar

An email from over a decade ago is reigniting the debate over whether projects like Ripple were once viewed as threats to Bitcoin’s development or simply competitors that some BTC supporters wanted to eliminate.

The email dated July 31, 2014, is believed to show Austin Hill—then introduced as CEO of Blockstream—telling Jeffrey Epstein (the convicted sex offender who died by suicide in prison) and other recipients that “Jed McCaleb’s new Ripple and Stellar are not good for the ecosystem.” Blockstream is a blockchain technology company focused on Bitcoin.

This exchange has resurfaced after the U.S. Department of Justice released millions of pages of documents under the Epstein Records Transparency Act, including emails, files, images, and videos related to previous investigations.

What does the email say?

The most notable element of the email is, of course, the mention of Jeffrey Epstein, and the current leadership of Blockstream quickly denied any ongoing financial ties.

However, the core story lies more in the sender’s argument than in the identities of the recipients.

Austin Hill believed that the flow of capital into Ripple and Stellar was not just competition but also “contamination.” He viewed these projects as threats that could “harm” Bitcoin’s future by dispersing investor consensus, developer focus, and the narrative strength centered around Bitcoin.

For many Bitcoin maximalists at the time, “ecosystem” did not mean the entire crypto market but almost exclusively Bitcoin and its surrounding infrastructure—as long as it didn’t undermine core principles.

This perspective is said to have “justified” the pressure expressed in the email.

Conversely, the XRP community sees this as evidence that early Bitcoin insiders attempted to steer capital away from Ripple.

XRP commentator Leonidas Hadjiloizou argued that this email was like an attempt to pressure investors into “taking sides,” even reducing or withdrawing their allocations to Blockstream if they also invested in Ripple or Stellar.

He stated:

“Austin Hill’s email to Epstein and Joichi Ito is just another example of Bitcoin maximalists trying to fight against Ripple and Stellar.”

The rediscovered email also drew responses from long-time Ripple figures. David Schwartz, Ripple’s former CTO, said he “wouldn’t be surprised” if this email was just “the tip of the iceberg,” adding:

“It seems Hill viewed supporting Ripple or Stellar as equivalent to becoming an opponent. It’s very likely he and others expressed similar views to many others.”

According to Schwartz, viewing supporters of other networks as “enemies” ultimately harms the entire industry.

However, he also emphasized that this email does not show any direct connection between Epstein and Ripple, XRP, or Stellar.

Is Ripple really “bad for the ecosystem”?

The irony in Hill’s 2014 warning is that the “harm” he feared, in a sense, actually happened—Ripple has become a major player in the industry. By 2026, Ripple not only survived but also solidified its position as a regulated infrastructure pillar in digital asset ecosystems.

However, this development did not lead to the catastrophic consequences for Bitcoin that maximalists once predicted.

In fact, Ripple’s evolution over the past decade shows that the “ecosystem” was always envisioned as larger than just Bitcoin.

The company’s most significant milestone was settling its lengthy legal battle with the SEC. The 2025 settlement, with a fine only a fraction of the initial demand, cleared the legal cloud that had hung over XRP for years.

This legal clarity paved the way for what early Bitcoin supporters feared: deeper integration with traditional financial institutions.

Today, Ripple appears less like a controversial project and more like a financial organization holding numerous licenses worldwide. The company has also expanded its custody services by acquiring Metaco (Switzerland) and Standard Custody & Trust, and has bought financial platforms such as GTreasury, Hidden Road, and the stablecoin platform Rail.

One of the strongest counterarguments to the “bad for the ecosystem” claim is that the market now accepts XRP as a legitimate asset class.

The launch of XRP ETF funds in late 2025, including products from firms like Franklin Templeton, shows Wall Street no longer views this asset as “contamination.”

Instead, the capital flowing into these products indicates that modern investors see the “ecosystem” not as a zero-sum game between Bitcoin and payment networks but as a diversified portfolio where many “horses” can coexist.

Can the Bitcoin and Ripple communities stop opposing each other?

Long before the advent of spot crypto ETFs or bank custody services, the Bitcoin community debated fiercely on forums about what is truly “good for the ecosystem.”

A prominent 2013 thread on Bitcointalk described Ripple as going against Bitcoin’s goals, criticizing its structure and incentive mechanisms. This became one of the ideological foundations that later evolved into the “maximalist” viewpoint.

Main criticisms focused on key points: governance control, token distribution, the degree of “enterprise-led” economic models, and whether partnerships with banks and regulators undermine Bitcoin’s political narrative.

In contrast, Ripple and Stellar supporters argue that faster, cheaper payment systems focused on payments are practical features, not ideological betrayals. They contend that early Bitcoin discourse often conflated “different design” with “existential threat.”

Although the 2014 email is mostly a “historical document,” it reflects recent policy and political conflicts, as the Bitcoin–Ripple debate shifted from forums to lobbying.

In early 2025, Jack Mallers—co-founder and CEO of Twenty One Capital—claimed Ripple was lobbying to prevent the U.S. from creating a Bitcoin-only strategic reserve fund, instead promoting XRP, which he described as centralized and enterprise-controlled.

He argued that XRP’s centralization conflicts with the goal of a Bitcoin reserve fund that supports industry, jobs, and technology.

This debate became more concrete when President Donald Trump announced that a U.S. strategic crypto reserve could include XRP alongside Bitcoin and other major tokens.

This clarified the familiar divide: Bitcoin maximalists support a single-asset reserve model, while multi-asset approaches benefit large token networks linked to the U.S.

These differences explain why the Bitcoin and Ripple communities have been at odds for years, despite both being among the most popular digital assets worldwide.

However, Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse seems to be trying to move the XRP community away from “battles,” repeatedly calling for cooperation and unity within the industry to help this emerging sector grow.