Record-breaking Bitcoin soars above $120k - up by more than double from a year ago
The digital coin rose as high as $123,200 –more than double the $60,000 it was valued at a year ago.
The latest rally came as so-called 'crypto week' got underway in the US.
This refers to a series of debates taking place in Washington DC that could lay the foundations for a regulatory framework for digital assets.
Tim Chen, global head of strategy at financial services firm Mantle, said the discussions should provide investors with 'some semblance of clarity' over the future of crypto – making it more attractive.
Bitcoin has rallied strongly since crashing to around $16,000 following the collapse of crypto exchange FTX three years ago.
The rally accelerated following the election of Donald Trump as investors and speculators welcomed his pledge to make the US the crypto capital of the world.
Josh Fraser, co-founder of decentralised platform Origin Protocol, said: 'Gold has been a primary store of value for hundreds of years, and bitcoin now competes as a better version of gold.'
Dan Coatsworth, investment analyst at broker AJ Bell, said: 'Traders are expecting something significant during crypto week.
'Bitcoin has now risen by nearly 10 per cent in just five days. This implies some FOMO – fear of missing out – a trend we've seen plenty of times in the past when bitcoin hit the headlines.
Crypto believers are convinced digital assets are the future of finance. While there is certainly momentum in terms of investor, government and corporate interest, it is not a slam dunk. There are still more questions than answers.'
Nigel Green, chief executive of financial advisory deVere Group, said he expects bitcoin to hit $125,000 'in the coming days' before moving up to $150,000.
'It's being powered by deep political backing, new regulatory clarity and sustained institutional inflows. This is a powerful combination we haven't seen at this scale before,' he said.
'This is not crypto on the fringe anymore. This is front and centre of US financial policy. Trump is championing it, lawmakers are acting on it and Wall Street is all-in.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
26 minutes ago
- The Independent
Facing fallout from Epstein and inflation President Donald Trump turns to misdirection
As the president faces a sustained rebellion among some of his most loyal MAGA influencers, and watches younger Americans who make up their audiences turn away, he appears desperate to find a new narrative on which his voters can fixate. Right-wing podcasters are far from the only ones talking about the issue. It has expanded through the so-called 'manosphere' and continues to dominate discussions on X, Reddit and other platforms including YouTube, where a wide range of political commentators are joining the fray. Reports indicate the issue has fractured the president's top advisers. The result: Trump is swinging at every potential issue that comes his way as he searches for a piece of red meat to throw at the hungry wolves. Over the weekend came the president's first and second attempts. A vow to revoke the citizenship of Rosie O'Donnell (clearly a pressing matter, and also, not legal) followed by a strangely-worded plea to his followers: just drop it, guys! Then a third, on Sunday: crashing the on-stage celebration of Chelsea as the club emerged victorious over PSG at the Club World Cup. 'What's going on with my 'boys' and, in some cases, 'gals'?' asked a very normal-sounding Trump on Truth Social over the weekend. 'We have a PERFECT Administration, THE TALK OF THE WORLD, and 'selfish people' are trying to hurt it, all over a guy who never dies, Jeffrey Epstein,' he continued. On Tuesday, the administration was hit with another bit of bad news. Inflation ticked up to its highest level in months in June as the president continued to threaten tariffs on the country's closest trading partners, and despite Trump's insistences to the contrary. For months, the president has raged at Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, demanding that he cut interest rates. Powell has refused, citing inflation risks; this clearly undermines Trump's insistence. Now, with Trump's so-called 'reciprocal' tariffs set to go into effect in just over two weeks, there will be even more questions aimed at the White House on the issue of how much higher prices will be for the average American consumer. Those immediate price hikes, should they continue or even accelerate, could severely undercut Republican members of Congress as they campaign for re-election into the beginning of next year on the passage of Trump's spending legislation which included the extension of the 2017 tax cuts. And so Trump needed a distraction. On Tuesday, that meant swinging at a familiar target: Adam Schiff, the junior Democratic senator from California. In a Truth Social post, he falsely accused Schiff of mortgage fraud for claiming a home in Maryland as his primary residence. But the practice is common for members of Congress, who spend months at a time working out of the Capitol and in decades past used to move their whole families to the D.C., Maryland or northern Virginia regions for ease of access to their jobs. Political pressure now forces many to maintain residences near the Capitol and back in their home states. This is of course hardly a burden for many members of Congress but can be difficult for younger members with more limited financial means. Legal analysts who looked at the residences have said that Trump's claims of clear illegality are false. And that's to say nothing of the can of worms the president could have opened with the following line: 'he must LIVE in CALIFORNIA because he was a Congressman from CALIFORNIA.' That could certainly be an awkward line of attack were it to be repurposed against Sen. Tommy Tuberville, the Alabama senator (and apparent Florida resident) who is now running for governor in the former state and already taking fire from Democrats on the issue of his residency. Schiff told Inside Washington on Tuesday that the post was 'just the latest example of political retaliation by Donald Trump against one of his perceived enemies'. But the president, right now, seems solely focused on moving his base past the one issue that has now divided it to a greater extent than anything since perhaps January 6. Ironically, that's the same kind of tunnel vision that led his vice president, JD Vance, to fan these flames to start with. It remains to see if he'll be successful, or if the administration can come up with something to satisfy his critics — who aren't growing any quieter. But the White House's current strategy reeks of desperation.
The Independent
31 minutes ago
- The Independent
Federal agency shifts stance on transgender discrimination complaints, but hurdles remain
The federal agency responsible for enforcing laws against workplace discrimination will allow some complaints filed by transgender workers to move forward, shifting course from earlier guidance that indefinitely stalled all such cases, according to an email obtained by The Associated Press. The email was sent earlier this month to leaders of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission with the subject line 'Hot Topics,' in which Thomas Colclough, director of the agency's Office of Field Programs, announced that if new transgender worker complaints involve 'hiring, discharge or promotion, you are clear to continue processing these charges.' But even those cases will still be subject to higher scrutiny than other types of workplace discrimination cases, requiring approval from President Donald Trump 's appointed acting agency head Andrea Lucas, who has said that one of her priorities would be 'defending the biological and binary reality of sex and related rights.' Since Trump regained office in January, the EEOC has moved away from its prior interpretation of civil rights law, marking a stark contrast to a decade ago when the agency issued a landmark finding that a transgender civilian employee of the U.S. Army had been discriminated against because her employer refused to use her preferred pronouns or allow her to use bathrooms based on her gender identity. Under Lucas's leadership, the EEOC has dropped several lawsuits on behalf of transgender workers. Lucas defended that decision during her June 18 Senate committee confirmation hearing in order to comply with the president's executive order declaring two unchangeable sexes. However, she acknowledged that a 2020 Supreme Court ruling — Bostock v. Clayton County — 'did clearly hold that discriminating against someone on the basis of sex included firing an individual who is transgender or based on their sexual orientation.' Colclough acknowledged in his July 1 email that the EEOC will consider transgender discrimination complaints that 'fall squarely under' the Supreme Court's ruling, such as cases involving hiring, firing and promotion. The email backtracked on an earlier policy, communicated verbally, that de-prioritized all transgender cases. The EEOC declined to comment on the specifics of its latest policy, saying: 'Under federal law, charge inquiries and charges of discrimination made to the EEOC are confidential. Pursuant to Title VII and as statutorily required, the EEOC is, has been, and will continue to accept and investigate charges on all bases protected by law, and to serve those charges to the relevant employer." But even the cases that the EEOC is willing to consider under Bostock must still be reviewed by a senior attorney advisor, and then sent to Lucas for final approval. This heightened review process is not typical for other discrimination charges and reflects the agency's increased oversight for gender identity cases, former EEOC commissioner Chai Feldblum told The AP in a Monday phone interview. 'It is a slight improvement because it will allow certain claims of discrimination to proceed," Feldblum said of the new policy. 'But overall it does not fix a horrific and legally improper situation currently occurring at the EEOC.' Colclough's email did not clarify how long the review process might take, or whether cases that include additional claims, such as harassment or retaliation, would be eligible to proceed, and the EEOC declined to address those questions. "This is not the EEOC being clear to either its own staff or to the public what charges are going to be processed," Feldblum said. 'This is not a panacea." ________ The Associated Press' women in the workforce and state government coverage receives financial support from Pivotal Ventures. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at
Telegraph
39 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Cuomo declares himself ‘anti-billionaire' as he re-enters New York mayoral race
Andrew Cuomo has seemingly declared himself an 'anti-billionaire' as he re-entered the New York mayoral race. Mr Cuomo, the former New York governor, lost the Democratic primary to socialist candidate Zohran Mamdani last month but on Monday announced he would stand as a third-party candidate. Mr Mamdani was propelled to victory by a campaign focused on the cost of living, with plans to raise the minimum wage to $30 an hour, freeze rent for stabilised tenants and build 200,000 affordable homes within a decade. In an interview with New York Magazine on Tuesday, Mr Cuomo likened himself to his 33-year-old rival, claiming they were both 'anti-billionaire'. 'I believe he is authentic in his political ideology… social, anti-business becomes anti-establishment, anti-billionaire,' he said of Mr Mamdani. 'Which, yeah, I'm anti-billionaire. They have too much money. Make them give it back, especially when we're having an affordability crisis.' Claims Cuomo adopted Mamdani's words The comments have prompted a row between the media and the Cuomo camp, who have pushed back on reports of their candidate's apparent adoption of Mr Mamdani's talking points. 'That's a silly manipulation of the governor's words: he was clearly explaining and mimicking Mamdani's campaign messag e and how it resonated with his supporters,' said Rich Azzopardi, Mr Cuomo's spokesman. 'That's not his position at all and both the context of the conversation makes that clear.' However, David Freedlander, the journalist who interviewed Mr Cuomo for New York Magazine, described the former governor's 'anti-billionaire' comments as his 'pitch for Mamdani voters'. As governor, Mr Cuomo pushed back on attempts by fellow Democrats in the state Senate as they attempted to impose a tax on millionaires, claiming it would cause wealthy individuals to flee New York. The state would be able to 'count on one hand the number of millionaires left' if they followed through with the plan, he said in 2019. He has also noted that one per cent of its population pay 50 per cent of its tax revenues, and blocked former New York City mayor Bill de Blasio's attempts to raise income taxes on those earning more than $500,000 in 2014. Elsewhere in the interview, Mr Cuomo said, like Mr Mamdani, he was in favour of freezing rent and introducing 'fast free buses'. 'I was not aggressive enough' Looking back on his failed primary campaign, the former governor said he had failed to cross-examine Mr Mamdani's policies, which he said would mean 'death for New York City'. 'I never really debunked his proposals because I just didn't engage. That was a mistake,' said Mr Cuomo, whom commentators criticised for running a listless campaign. 'I made a mistake. I was not as aggressive as I should be, which is really ironic because my whole life people have been saying about me, 'Oh, he's too aggressive, too combative, pushed too hard'.' He continued: 'It was just a mistake, and it's not a mistake I'm going to make again.' So far, Mr Cuomo faces an uphill battle to win the mayoral election in November, with the anti-Mamdani vote split between Eric Adams, the current mayor, Republican candidate Curtis Sliwa, and Jim Walden, an independent. 'You run a multi-candidate field, Mamdani wins,' Mr Cuomo said. 'One-on-one is the best shot, and the goal is stopping Mamdani. Whoever has the best shot to do that should go forward.'
