The phenomenon of presidential meme coins: A decade of unfulfilled promises in the crypto ecosystem

When political tokens lose value as quickly as they gained popularity, few people want to take responsibility for facilitating the experiment. In late January 2025, during the U.S. presidential inauguration commemorations, something unprecedented in modern politics happened: a winning candidate launched his own digital token along with his wife.

Inside a neoclassical auditorium near Washington, while internationally renowned DJs energized a millionaire celebration, thousands of guests—including politicians, crypto entrepreneurs, and influencers—watched a social media announcement. Within hours, the price of these tokens skyrocketed from fractions of a cent to spectacular highs. Less than 72 hours later, both tokens experienced 90% crashes in their valuations.

How a “worthless asset” generated hundreds of millions in profits

Presidential tokens are not traditional investments. Without real products, cash flows, or tangible return promises: they represent speculation in its purest form. Their only “value” lies in what others are willing to pay in the next buying cycle.

According to blockchain tracking analysis, internal traders and their business associates extracted over $350 million in profits during the launch weekend. Meanwhile, hundreds of thousands of retail investors lost their funds.

This pattern—massive gains for insiders, devastating losses for beginners—is not new in decentralized markets. However, it had never before occurred on a presidential scale or with such little regulatory scrutiny.

The origin of meme coins: from satire to capital extraction machine

The story of meme coins begins as an academic joke. In 2013, two software engineers created Dogecoin using a viral internet meme: a specific breed dog with a characteristic expression. The intent was to satirize the uncontrolled proliferation of digital currencies following Bitcoin’s emergence.

What happened was the opposite of what was planned. Within weeks, Dogecoin reached a market capitalization of $12 million. Sports teams were sponsored. Online communities formed. The “worthless” asset had generated real value for early believers.

“I sincerely hope people don’t see the Dogecoin phenomenon and turn every internet meme into a digital token,” warned one of the original founders. But his warning proved prophetic in its failure: exactly that is what happened over the next 12 years.

When prominent public figures began endorsing these assets—especially after validation by tech magnates—the launch speed accelerated exponentially. Dozens of new tokens emerged monthly. Some early winners multiplied their investments by factors of 50x, 100x, or more within hours.

The platform that democratized unrestricted speculation

A particular application became the epicenter of the phenomenon: a launch platform that removed all technical barriers to creating digital tokens. It allowed users without programming knowledge to issue blockchain assets in seconds.

Creating a token required only clicks. No verification. No documentation. No regulatory requirements. The initial price started from fractions of a cent, rising solely based on speculative demand.

According to platform data, it facilitated the launch of approximately 1,400 new tokens. In transaction fees alone, it generated nearly $1 trillion in revenue since January 2024.

The founder of this platform, a 22-year-old entrepreneur, explained the underlying philosophy: “The efficient markets hypothesis suggests this should never work. But reality proves otherwise: it makes real money.”

When asked about the speculative nature of the ecosystem, he stated he designed the system to “give everyone a fair chance to participate.” But veteran traders and operators describe a more complex reality: an ecosystem full of “conspiracies and betrayals” where initial beneficiaries almost always profit at the expense of later investors.

The revealed pattern: price manipulation on a presidential scale

As investigators began tracking transactions on public blockchain records, a disturbing pattern emerged. Certain wallet addresses bought huge amounts of presidential tokens seconds after launch, before the general public had access. One particular address purchased $1.1 million worth, sold three days later, and made $100 million in pure inflated speculation.

Independent researchers linked these transactions to specific individuals: a former university advisor turned crypto operations consultant; executives of decentralized exchange platforms; and a network of intermediaries whose sole purpose seemed to be “inflating the price and extracting gains before the collapse.”

One of these operators was especially frank in internal communications: “Sell everything possible, even if the price hits zero,” he instructed his associates. “Guys, let’s be honest, we’re going to squeeze this token to the max.”

The invisible actors behind the curtain

A name kept recurring in investigations: a businessman who had spent decades promoting dubious financial schemes. In the 2000s, he filled auditoriums with “real estate wealth” events. In 2022, he launched collectible digital cards of political figures for $99 each, generating multimillion-dollar profits. By 2025, he had found his true calling in unregulated digital assets.

This individual was listed as “authorized” in the presidential token corporate records, though publicly denying any deep involvement.

Even more intriguing was an executive from a decentralized exchange platform: someone known within the ecosystem by the nickname “Meow” (whose online avatar was a feline with an astronaut helmet). This Singaporean entrepreneur had built a platform enabling frictionless token launches, earning commissions on each speculative transaction.

As meme coins proliferated, his platform became the preferred venue for high-profile launches. According to trading volume analysis, approximately 90% of exchange revenue came from these speculative assets.

“The dollar is also a meme coin,” argued this executive in an interview. “Every financial asset depends on collective belief. Bitcoin, stocks, fiat currencies: they are all memes in essence.”

The Argentine case: when the presidential scandal exposes the global network

Real connections only emerged when another national leader was caught in a similar scandal. One month after the U.S. presidential launches, Argentina’s president endorsed a token that collapsed hours later. Panicked, he deleted his public endorsements.

What followed was a digital forensics exercise: investigators tracking blockchain transactions linked this scandal to the same network of operators responsible for the U.S. presidential tokens. The same former university advisor. The same tactics. The same value extraction patterns.

An associate of the Argentine operator decided to come forward as a whistleblower. He described a sophisticated conspiracy: “They contacted us asking for ‘operational help’ for token launches. But the real goal was clear from day one: to make as much money as possible for insiders, regardless of the cost to retail investors.”

The whistleblower recounted seeing communications where the main operator instructed collaborators to “sell when market cap reaches $100 million” and “do it in a way that looks anonymous.” Another message: “They said everything should seem disconnected, but we knew exactly who was orchestrating each move.”

Absent regulation, diffuse responsibility

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission officially announced it would not regulate these assets specifically. Its only warning: “Other anti-fraud laws may apply.” But by December 2024, no regulator had filed formal charges against the main actors.

A White House spokesperson was repeatedly questioned about conflicts of interest. Her response: “The president and his family participate in activities during their private time. Suggesting profit from the office is absurd.”

But records showed something different. Months after the token launches, the biggest buyers were invited to private dinners at presidential golf clubs. Crypto executives with billions in digital assets dined alongside government officials. A senator described it as “an unregulated orgy of corruption.”

The architecture of modern fraud: 2025 in retrospect

When evaluating the phenomenon as a whole, it became clear it represented something unprecedented: a value extraction machine operated by highly sophisticated individuals, using blockchain technology, decentralized platforms without oversight, and direct political influence from the country’s most powerful executive.

By December, both presidential tokens had fallen more than 90% from their highs. The president’s token traded at $5.9 (compared to $74 at its peak); the first lady’s at just $0.11, practically worthless.

Internal operators disappeared from public view. Their social media accounts were deactivated. But blockchain records showed they continued operating similar speculative assets under different corporate structures.

A law firm officially established a new trading app in early 2025, though publicly denounced by the president’s relatives as “unauthorized.” The family promised to launch their own rival crypto app.

Another operator announced a mobile video game incorporating elements of the presidential tokens. But the market did not respond enthusiastically: the news did not boost prices. Investors, repeatedly “caught,” had exhausted their speculative capital.

Final reflections: the absence of limits when there is no oversight

An investor lawyer who sued operators for fraud summarized the phenomenon: “It’s the ultimate value extraction machine, designed and implemented by highly capable people who understand the exact limits of regulatory oversight: which essentially do not exist.”

Court cases remain unresolved. The defendants—operators, platform executives, consultants—deny all allegations. They argue their platforms simply provided technology, that they did not control “users’ intentions,” that the entire industry is inherently speculative.

The president and his family continued diversifying their crypto investments: buying Bitcoin as a “strategic reserve” for the government; promoting pardons for sector billionaires; allowing relatives to operate cryptocurrency mining companies.

As the meme coin craze faded toward the end of 2025, the main operators pivoted to new industries: prediction markets, non-fungible digital assets, and other underexplored regulatory frontiers.

One last irony: a decentralized betting platform even created a prediction market on whether the former university advisor would end up in prison that year. The quoted odds suggest such an outcome is unlikely.

The market, as always, had spoken.