XRP Army Rift: Zach Rector Accuses Jake Claver Of Misleading The Community

Internal conflict rocks the XRP community as prominent figures clash over transparency and influence.

Zach Rector's public accusations against Jake Claver have exposed a deepening divide within the so-called 'XRP Army.' The allegations center on claims of community manipulation and misleading narratives—a familiar tune in crypto circles where influencer clout often trumps fundamental analysis.

The Core Allegations

Rector's statements suggest a pattern of information control that potentially steers retail sentiment. The dispute highlights the ongoing tension between grassroots advocacy and centralized messaging within digital asset communities.

Community Fallout

Social media channels fracture as supporters align behind opposing figures. The rift emerges during a critical period for XRP's market positioning—proving once again that crypto's most volatile asset isn't always the token itself, but the human drama surrounding it.

Market Implications

While internal conflicts rarely impact long-term technology trajectories, they create unnecessary noise that distracts from substantive developments. The financial industry watches with typical Wall Street amusement—another day, another crypto community eating its own while traditional finance quietly builds infrastructure.

Transparency becomes collateral damage when personality cults collide with decentralized ideals. The XRP community now faces its truest test: navigating internal discord without compromising the protocol's broader vision.

The $100 XRP Call

Rector said he has challenged the $100 XRP claim throughout 2025 and was surprised Claver continued doubling down into the final days of the year. In Rector’s telling, the problem is not prediction-making, he said he has missed targets too, but the way extreme outcomes were marketed as near-certain, with the implication of privileged information.

He played a clip from Claver’s live show after Rector criticized the $100 call. When confronted, Claver did not concede, instead implying he may “know something.”

“If I was going to pivot, should have pivoted by now,” Claver said in the clip Rector quoted. “Unless I know something. Why wouldn’t I? … We’ll see what ends up happening by the end of the year. We’ll see where the price is. And I think the results will speak for themselves.”

Rector argued that this kind of messaging: NDA-coded, “trust me” signaling becomes a lever inside XRP culture, where many holders have learned to treat timelines and insider claims as tradable narratives. Rector calls this behaviour “manipulation,” saying Claver’s “business model is so reliant upon that manipulation” that he “can’t back out now.”

Addressing Jake Claver lies Part 1 pic.twitter.com/rmVMK3XtUH

— Zach Rector (@ZachRector7) December 31, 2025

Serious Allegations

Rector’s sharper allegations go beyond price talk and into what he described as XRP-focused funds offered through Digital Wealth Partners (DWP). He claimed the community has sent “so much XRP” into Claver’s orbit and that there is “a massive discrepancy from what he’s saying publicly and what investors are telling me privately.”

“Jake and his scheme, his business has grown so big they’ve taken in so much XRP from our community,” Rector said. “There’s a massive discrepancy from what he’s saying publicly and what investors are telling me privately.”

Rector said he has received fund reports and performance updates and claimed he is not sharing them publicly out of concern about retaliation, alleging investors have been warned not to share reporting and that reports are being watermarked with timestamps. He also made a specific performance claim: “one of the funds… has been losing money all year,” he said, adding it “lost over 4% on the year,” before fees, including “AUM fees of 2% in some cases.”

Addressing Jake Claver lies Part 2 pic.twitter.com/rYkmJ1jsfr

— Zach Rector (@ZachRector7) December 31, 2025

Rector’s broader point was that XRP holders are being asked to accept a “trust me bro relationship” around returns, even as he says he has not heard from any investor who can confirm “payments and distributions coming out” in a way that matches the marketing.

To explain why he views the trust gap as serious for XRP holders, Rector leaned on a prior legal dispute involving Claver and Digital Ascension. Rector said the case is public record and described it as “VeriVend versus Jacob Levi Claver and Digital Ascension Group” in the Western District of New York. He read from what he described as court filings and emphasized that the allegations and admissions, as he presented them, involve fabricated wire confirmations and impersonation.

“This is a serious deal,” Rector said, arguing the behavior he described should matter to XRP holders being asked to trust performance claims, NDAs, and time-sensitive narratives. He urged viewers to review the “answer to the complaint,” which he said includes admissions such as registering a VeriVend-related domain and fabricating purported wire transfer confirmations.

Rector also said the case settled, pointing to a “mediation certification” dated Feb. 12, 2025. He claimed, separately, that Claver paid the opposition in XRP to settle, an assertion Rector stated as a confirmation.

Rector framed his goal as containment rather than escalation, saying he wants the community “to stay together” and “not be divided,” but he also laid down an explicit remedy: third-party verification. “I want a third-party audit of those funds,” he said, arguing that absent audited financials he will not trust performance reporting tied to XRP strategies.

At press time, XRP traded at $1.85.