Trump tariffs shorting 735 million USD! Hyperliquid Whale denies insider trading

On October 10, less than an hour before U.S. President Trump announced a 100% tariff on China, a mysterious wallet opened a short position worth $735 million in Bitcoin on Hyperliquid, sparking intense suspicions of insider trading within the crypto assets community. Former BitForex CEO Garrett Jin urgently issued a statement earlier this week denying involvement, claiming "there is no relation to the Trump family."

Mysterious short positions an hour before the tariff announcement

(Source: Hyperliquid)

Last week, about 60 minutes before U.S. President Donald Trump announced "100% tariffs on China," the cryptocurrency market experienced an unusually severe fluctuation. A whale wallet on the Hyperliquid platform suddenly established a large short position in Bitcoin, with timing that raises suspicion.

After the tariff news was released, the price of Bitcoin plummeted to about $102,000 on Friday, bringing significant profits for short positions. This event immediately ignited enthusiastic discussions in the crypto assets community about the possibilities of Hyperliquid and Trump insider trading.

· Amazing operational details of the controversial Wallet

Crypto Assets researcher Eye revealed key evidence of this suspected insider trading case on the X platform on Saturday:

Wallet Operation Timeline:

Less than 1 hour before the tariff announcement on October 10: Opening large-scale BTC short positions.

Short positions amount: BTC worth 735 million USD

Wallet Scale: Controlling over 100,000 BTC

Profit Result: Bitcoin took profits after falling to $102,000.

Eye claims that the wallet address is controlled by BitForex's former CEO Garrett Jin, and suggests that this whale may have insider information on Trump's policies. As the founder of a well-known crypto exchange shares Eye's post to over 10 million fans, this controversy quickly spreads.

· Garrett Jin responds: I have no relation to the Trump family

In the face of overwhelming accusations, the now-defunct crypto exchange BitForex's former CEO Garrett Jin issued a statement on the X platform on Monday, strongly denying involvement in the accusations of Hyperliquid and Trump insider trading.

Jin's main point of defense: "I have no relationship with the Trump family," Jin clearly stated in the statement, completely denying the possibility of insider trading. He further explained that the disputed wallet belongs to a client and is not directly controlled or operated by him.

Jin also criticized the exchange founder for reposting Eye's post, believing that this act leaked "personal privacy information" and caused him undue distress. He emphasized that he is merely a former executive of the exchange and does not have access to internal information on U.S. government policies.

Trump later retracted some statements

It is worth noting that Trump stated "Don't worry about China" in a social media post on October 12, and retracted some of his hardline rhetoric on tariffs. This shift has led to more questions in the market regarding Friday's policy announcement and added new controversial aspects to insider trading speculation.

· The Doubts and Evidence Chain of Internet Detectives

Although Eye presented evidence linking Jin to the controversial Wallet, other well-known detectives in the Crypto Assets community are skeptical of this claim.

Experts have differing opinions:

Well-known on-chain detective ZachXBT stated over the weekend that it is more likely that "Jin's friend" is responsible for these trading operations, rather than Jin himself. He believes it is too hasty to equate Jin directly with insider trading.

Crypto Assets analyst Quinten Francois further questioned the reliability of the evidence, asserting that the evidence linking the former CEO to the Wallet is "too far-fetched" and lacks decisive on-chain data support.

Focus of Evidence Controversy:

1. Insufficient proof of Wallet ownership.

2. The communication channel between Jin and the Trump administration is unclear.

3. Is timing coincidence equivalent to insider trading?

4. The boundary between customer trading and personal operations is blurred.

5. The gray area of insider trading in crypto assets

The controversy surrounding Hyperliquid and Trump insider trading is not the first case in the realm of cryptocurrency. In fact, allegations of exchange executives and project teams profiting from information advantages are occasionally heard in the industry.

Historical Case Review

· Bubb Memecoin Incident in March 2025

An unidentified individual or group made over $482,000 through the Bubb (BUBB) memecoin trading, after which the price of the coin plummeted by about 50%. The suspicious timing of the trades has raised community concerns about insider manipulation of the market.

· Official Memecoin of Trump in January 2025

Trump's memecoin "Trump Official" (TRUMP) attracted similar attention when it launched in January. A wallet purchased approximately 6 million dollars worth of tokens in less than a minute after the token was launched, prompting market speculation about potential insider information leaks.

The Dilemma of Regulatory Vacuum

The decentralized nature of the crypto assets market and the anonymity of transaction mechanisms make it extremely difficult to investigate and gather evidence for insider trading. The strict information disclosure regulations in traditional financial markets have not yet been fully established in the crypto field, and this regulatory vacuum provides operational space for suspicious transactions.

Current Regulatory Challenges:

1. On-chain anonymity makes it difficult to trace real identities.

2. The jurisdiction of cross-border transactions is ambiguous.

3. Lack of a unified standard for insider trading identification

4. Difficulties in regulating decentralized platforms

5. The follow-up developments of the event are worth close attention.

The controversy surrounding Hyperliquid and Trump’s insider trading highlights the urgent need for sensitivity to policy and transparency issues in the cryptocurrency market. Regardless of whether Garrett Jin was truly involved, this incident has prompted regulators and market participants to reassess the fairness of trading.