What @barrycooper describes is not Bitcoin being actually "hacked" but rather "anchored", that is to say it has got a large enough number of address/real-life ID mappings that are documented and accessible to financial authorities and law enforcement through exchanges KYC records that an overwhelming majority of users, including some that never KYC'd, can now be doxed by correlating them through all their transactions with other users that have been KYC'd, in what amounts to some sort of transitive doxing. It takes advanced technical skills and a flawless discipline to avoid letting any finger-prints that would allow the connection to be made.
Actually it's that bad that some undisclosed government agency has ordered to MIT a layer-2 technology to create a distributed KYC database on top of Bitcoin to make more systematic the address anchoring: Chain Anchor.
So, although I don't agree with some speculative views, @barrycooper is dead right on his core message here: "anonymity" and Bitcoin aren't exactly synonym. Now, that doesn't mean that Bitcoin isn't a major improvement over using completely centralized means of payment that are even more easily traceable. Bitcoin doesn't ask you who you are and will send any amount of money anywhere without questioning where the money came from. And in a very large number of cases, it is way too costly for law enforcement to establish a sufficient proof of the relation between a Bitcoin address and a real person that they usually won't even attempt to do it for minor victim-less crimes like minor tax evasion, buying weed etc. But for someone doing something that has a high enough profile to justify having agents dedicated to investigating the case, and who isn't a prodigy of network security, it's wise not to assume that using Bitcoin improves anonymity.
The point where I disagree is the assertion that Bitcoin is a CIA project. We truly have no evidence of that, and there are dozen equally good or even much better explanations. Even assuming Bitcoin was introduced by a government agency, NSA sounds like a more likely candidate, and we can't discount the possibility of factions within the government selectively increasing people's freedom to serve their design and further their own secret agenda. Tor is a good example of that kind of interested gift. The more recent Georges Soros leak contains many more examples.
Your comment is a fair assessment @recursive. Thanks.