they may not fully adopt but the volume of bitcoin trading alone says US is one of the very top traders in the world. so we don't need to wait for the full adoption because the adoption itself is already happening.
and there are several politicians that are already pro-btc or pro-crypto as listed in this coindesk's article and it is still growing, now that we are already in 2021.

It is a wake up call to nation States not to neglect the importance of crypto in today's world and the role it will play in economic sustainability,  much time has passed since crypto has been in existence and breaking headlines but the government official's choose to ignore it, Hillary is simply drawing their attention to the inevitable.

US government has a pride indeed but they are also practical government that will take side on which will help their economy meaning at some point this is bitcoin.
Hillary Clinton is a supporter of bitcoin for long now and she stands favoring this .
But the problem is the administration now, if this is favored as well in which i doubt they are.
But anyway this one of the best news ever released these past months .

They don't understand Bitcoin and their hate against Bitcoin prevents them to spend their time to learn about Bitcoin.

Together, they say stupid statement about Bitcoin and one more thing, they feel their traditional power is in dangerous with the appearance and growth of Bitcoin. Bitcoin has faster growth than the Internet as pointed out by Willy Woo.

Hillary reminds us about JP Morgan with two statements in 2017 and 2021

Willy Woo: https://twitter.com/woonomic/status/1356310219215699968
JP Morgan 2017: https://www.reuters.com/article/legal-us-usa-banks-conference-jpmorgan-idUSKCN1BN2PN
JP Morgan 2021: https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/jpmorgan-give-all-wealth-clients-access-crypto-funds-business-insider-2021-07-22/

I'd say by buying it. I mean, lots of it. I'm thinking, if Bitcoin is indeed a serious threat to fiat currencies including the USD and its status as a reserve currency, why should they not then accumulate a lot of Bitcoin? Isn't it logical to do it? In which case, whether the threat will translate into something else or remain to be just a threat, at least the US has already made preparations.

By saying that Bitcoin is an emerging threat and doing nothing about it, or perhaps opposing its rise which is futile as Bitcoin is more or less immortal so to speak, they are courting unnecessary risk.


I cannot cite any example but I assume there must have been powerful kingdoms in human history that crumbled due to stubbornness.

I am also quite confused by Hillary Clinton's statement, why she is only worried about Bitcoin now. Maybe she not paid attention to
the development of Bitcoin so far, after all as long as Bitcoin was created until now there is  no indication that it will harm fiat.
Because from the beginning Bitcoin was created not to replace fiat, but only as an alternative payment. As you said both Bitcoin and fiat
have their place, they will co-exist and complement each other. Bitcoin can grow rapidly like this, because Bitcoin can indeed provide
an income solution in a pandemic situation like now to everyone. So Bitcoin will never replace fiat, so there is no need to worry about
the presence of Bitcoin.

I think it's a threat for USD to last until the end, it's not easy for them to defend it, because behind it all, people have started paying attention to cryptocurrencies. But I also feel that USD and cryptocurrencies will fight for their strength, even they are equally strong and can be expected ..!!

Funny thing is Bitcoin is more of threat to USD when the USD is handled poorly. For example when the US government prints trillions and trillions more dollars than they can recover in tax revenue, thus inflating the currency.

Basically what Hillary wants is the ability for the Gov to mess around with the US dollar without a viable alternative for their citizens.

Bitcoin changes that landscape, allowing an alternative for when their citizens say enough is enough.

So conversely it’s the government’s mismanagement of the USD that makes Bitcoin attractive and gives it more power. Hell Satoshi likely built Bitcoin as response to runaway USD inflation and printing by central banks. Satoshi spoke about that around the inception of Bitcoin and made a great point about the inflation control built into Bitcoin at its core. Not just core code but core philosophy.

Bitcoin would have less power, less reason to exist if fiat currencies like the USD were managed in the best interest of the population and not in the best interest of government power and banks power.

Hillary intelligently deflects by saying Bitcoin is the issue.

When they don't have control over it, the government consider it a threat. This seems to be the common view of governments. Very few governments understand it in the right way and try to benefit out of it. America being the world leader in terms of economy it has direct/indirect control over every country.

As said, rather than considering it a threat learning the way to succeed is the right thing. The governments have the power to frame laws, but it is the users who find ways to use it bypassing the laws and restrictions. So, her words aren't gonna make any impact over the market.

I don't think any company in stablecoins at the moment would be trusted by any government to handle their currency either.

Only a few countries produce most of the currencies in the world too, they'd likely not want to lose that monopoly. There probably will be a few cbdcs to spring up but I doubt there will be any way it's made less favourable than storing money in a bank (governments want you to need banks so they can claim to be the reason the economy has grown).