Former Ripple CTO interprets the email as evidence supporting XRP or Stellar’s ‘key opponents’ theory for Bitcoin.
In a recent video, wealth-focused commentator Kamilah Stevenson dissects a newly surfaced 2014 email that, she argues, reframes XRP’s early history.
Drawing on documents released by the U.S. Department of Justice, she highlights internal communications from a key Bitcoin infrastructure founder that appear to urge investors not to back Ripple and Stellar alongside Bitcoin ventures.
“Two Horses in the Same Race”: Early XRP Seen as a Threat
According to Stevenson, the standout document is an email written in 2014 by Austin Hill, a co-founder of Bitcoin infrastructure firm Blockstream. In that message, Hill reportedly warned a small circle of “wealthy, influential” investors that supporting Ripple and Stellar while funding Bitcoin-focused companies was like “backing two horses in the same race.”
Stevenson says Hill went further, describing Ripple and Stellar as “bad for the ecosystem” that group was trying to build, and framing investors who backed those projects as effectively working against them. This was not a public market debate, she stresses, but “private pressure behind closed doors” about who should, and should not, receive capital.
The implication: XRP was not neglected by accident. It was noticed early, viewed as a strategic threat, and treated as something that needed to be opposed rather than ignored.
David Schwartz’s Read: Opponent, Not Just Competitor
Kamilah Stevenson notes that Ripple’s former CTO David Schwartz publicly responded after the email began circulating. He did not dispute its authenticity or tone. Instead, he interpreted Hill’s message as clearly signaling that anyone supporting Ripple or Stellar was considered an “opponent” by that group, not simply a competitor.
Schwartz also suggested that this was likely not an isolated opinion; similar attitudes were “probably expressed to many other people behind the scenes,” according to Stevenson’s summary.
At the same time, he explicitly stated he was not aware of any connections between Jeffrey Epstein and Ripple, XRP, or Stellar, and that there was no evidence of meetings or collaboration with Epstein-linked actors.
For Ms. Stevenson, that distinction matters: the controversy around XRP’s early treatment appears rooted in ecosystem positioning, not scandal.
What It Means For XRP’s Trajectory & Market Perception
Stevenson argues that these documents suggest the early crypto landscape was “political” and “strategic,” not neutral.
With a core Bitcoin infrastructure player allegedly discouraging capital flows to Ripple and Stellar, she sees XRP’s survival and continued role in payments, liquidity, and settlement as evidence of durability under pressure.
She also points to XRP’s partial regulatory clarity in the U.S. — specifically that it has been found not to be a security in certain contexts — as part of why she treats it as a long-term, structurally significant asset rather than a speculative trade.
Her focus is on assets that have already been “tested by opposition, time, and pressure,” with XRP squarely in that category.
Stevenson repeatedly emphasizes that she is not making financial recommendations and that her commentary is for educational purposes, noting she is “not 100% clear that everything is 100% correct” and is relying on what has been observed in the DOJ-released materials and public responses.
For crypto investors, the episode underscores how much early capital allocation may have been shaped by private infrastructure players, and why XRP’s market narrative cannot be understood solely through price charts or the later SEC lawsuit.
Discover DailyCoin’s popular crypto news today:
Stellar Trapped: XLM Bounce Stalls Despite Oversold Record
XRP Analyst Warns Retail Investors Could Be “Priced Out”
