I would say “taken” is fair; but “stolen” isn’t exactly right.
Plus there is no way it will be that much.
Well in this case people intended their money to go one place, but they got tricked and it ended up in another. I'd call that stealing.
Whether it got technically stolen from the charity or whatever they meant it to go to or from the original owner, that's debatable.
This was replaced by modern Fraud crimes this century. The new crimes reduce what prosecutors need to show somewhat. With "Theft by deception" there can be a problem if the prosecutor struggles to show that the defendant actually permanently deprived the victim of something of value, especially if the victim realised there was a problem in time to use some sort of "claw back" mechanism. With Fraud the prosecutor can show that the defendant intended to gain even if ultimately that didn't work, so long as the deception actually happened the crime was not merely attempted.
All these Tweets are Fraud by False Representation under that replacement law, because the tweet deliberately pretends to be from somebody (e.g. Apple or Bill Gates) when it's actually from the perpetrator of the crime and it's clear that they intended to gain from getting Bitcoin sent to this account even if a prosecutor can't prove how much they actually made.
That's all that's happening here, except in units of BTC and not USD...