"... including to invest for his own account, to make tens of millions of dollars of political contributions, and to cover billions of dollars in expenses and debts of Alameda Research, a cryptocurrency hedge fund also founded by the defendant."
The prosecutors also said evidence will show that Mr. Bankman-Fried violated campaign finance laws “by causing political contributions to candidates and committees associated with both major political parties to be made in the names of co-conspirators, when in fact those contributions were funded by Alameda Research with misappropriated customer funds."
ADDED: Both major political parties? That's a bit disingenuous. According to Market Watch, SBF "gave almost all of the $40 million to Democratic politicians or groups, and just over $200,000 to Republicans." That's 99.5% to the Democrats. But:
He told video blogger Tiffany Fong that he donated as much to Republicans as he did to Democrats, but the GOP donations were “dark-money” contributions, making his claim difficult to verify. Such secret contributions, allowed by the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United ruling, wouldn’t show up in the FEC disclosures used to compile MarketWatch’s list....
ALSO: From Financial Advisor: "At least $73 million of political donations tied to Sam Bankman-Fried’s FTX may be at risk of being clawed back as bankruptcy lawyers sort through the remnants of his crypto empire in search of assets to repay creditors.... Recouping campaign funds as part of the bankruptcy proceedings is a complicated and lengthy process, and the scope of the total funds eligible for clawback depends on myriad federal and state laws. It is also subject to the bankruptcy lawyers’ judgment on what money, which may be long spent by the time the FTX trustees try to go after it, is worth the effort."
Posts
47 comments:
When I wake up in the morning
And the Bahamanians give a warning
But I know I can't avoid it in time
By the time my lies are straight
And congress gets quite irate
The DOJ swoops in with charges and I can't testify!
It's alright 'coz I'm saved by the feds!
The committee was gonna pop a test
My testimony was gonna be a mess
I couldn't use "my dog ate all my homework last night"
Maxine would be hiding in her chair
I really really can't be there
If I could get delay of some kind you know I'd be alright!
It's alright 'coz I'm saved by the feds!
It's alright 'coz I'm saved by the
It's alright 'coz I'm saved by the
IT'S ALRIGHT 'COZ I'M SAVED BY THE FEDS!
"That's a big disingenuous."
No. That's a clear attempt at misdirection to CYA for Democrats.
Kind of like the IRS blocked charitable designations for both the left and right applicants.
yeah but both!
LOL. the left will seize on that part.
Maxine Waters(D) (the democrat who commands her party faithful harass anyone not a loyal D) Blows kisses to Bank-man-Fried
Bankman-Fried 2022 = Bernie Madoff 2008
Both were connected insiders who had the complete trust of powerful cliques. Both had scam insider investment funds and both scams stayed hidden as long as the asset values were high on paper.
The world accidentally discovered the Democrat's "dark money pool" of the 2020 and 2022 elections because crypto imploded and someone had to cover their leveraged positions. Bye bye FTX...Maxine Waters' best buddy went down.
I half think that no money was 'stolen' per se, just handed to SBF as a bumbling stooge to cover the tracks and motives of the true billionaire donors. SBF was so naïve and sloppy that it provided plausible deniability: "I was trying to diversify as a crypto investor. I was not trying to donate to politicians."
Some are complaining SBF's sudden arrest blocked his testimony on Capitol Hill. Was this a cover up to silence him? Was this a fed coverup of their failure to catch him sooner?
ADDED: Both major political parties? That's a bit disingenuous. According to Market Watch, SBF "gave almost all of the $40 million to Democratic politicians or groups, and just over $200,000 to Republicans." That's 99.5% to the Democrats. But: He told video blogger Tiffany Fong that he donated as much to Republicans as he did to Democrats, but the GOP donations were “dark-money” contributions, making his claim difficult to verify.
He did contribute major amounts of money to both parties.
All of the Republicans he supported voted to impeach Trump.
You just do not want to deal with the truth.
Both parties are corrupt.
The only alternative to corruption in the entire political sphere right now is Trump.
"He told video blogger Tiffany Fong that he donated as much to Republicans as he did to Democrats, but the GOP donations were “dark-money” contributions, making his claim difficult to verify."
How convenient. We should definitely believe him because he would not lie about this or misappropriate funds.
Dark money. Democracy dies in darkness.
Black bodies. Demos-cracy is aborted at the twilight fringe.
Plausible but not probable under a veil of privacy.
What a crock:
"He told video blogger Tiffany Fong that he donated as much to Republicans as he did to Democrats, but the GOP donations were “dark-money” contributions, making his claim difficult to verify. Such secret contributions, allowed by the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United ruling, wouldn’t show up in the FEC disclosures used to compile MarketWatch’s list.... "
What a crock.
Citizens United is about SPEECH - not donations. Certainly it has nothing to do with "secret donations" -
The collective left know Bankman-Fried makes them look bad - so here come the lies.
Here is some background on Citizen's Untied.
The left know they look like creeps - so here come the lies and BS.
If he made those "secret donations" to Republicans - There would be receipts.
By law.
Sure would like to see a list of the R donations Bankman claims to have given money to. Oh wait - it's a secret - It's "dark money"...
He is a democrat donor - and a crook. The two go hand in hand. That he is lying about his supposed R donations = desperation.
Let's get ahead of the curve, and just state right now that Mr. Bankman-Fried did not kill himself.
"Attorney Overseeing FTX Bankruptcy Testifies Before Congress: ‘Grossly Inexperienced’ People Ran Company, Went On $5 Billion ‘Spending Binge’"
How does one go on a $5 BILLION spending binge? I wouldn't even no where to start.
This is like that video of the woman getting catcalled in NYC and she insisted that loads of White men were also very offensive but weren't in the video because they were always off camera cut off by fire hydrants or car honks or jack hammers.
All those Republicans who received money but it was coincidentally always in a way that doesn't leave a record.
WE Want to know MORE! More About Sultry Wood Nymphs!!!
The Tharnos (sic) lady was at least Kinda attractive.. We can understand Why bankers gave HER Billions.
But the Sultry Wood Nymph? She MUST have had some SPECIAL Skills to suck up Her billions..
WHAT was Her Skill set? What were Her Techniques?
As I recall from BK law, certain transactions can be clawed back into the estate depending how long ago the transaction was done.
But the *moral* and *right* thing to do is for all the politicians to pay to the BK estate that donated money.
This should be a big, big deal.
The Dems profited from a thief.
Republicans are worse at taking advantage of stuff like this than Democrats. Maybe the press is a reason. I predict a nothing burger or it will cause eyes to glaze over.
There will never be a mainstream news story leading with "SBF, major Democrat supporter, fraudulently funneled millions of investor dollars to mostly Democrats".
Again - Citizens Untied is about Speech - not donations
The left will allow this BS to cover for his democrat donations - but do not be fooled. It's a clear lie.
Citizen's United:
"The court held 5-4 that the free speech clause of the First Amendment prohibits the government from restricting independent expenditures for political campaigns by corporations, including nonprofit corporations, labor unions, and other associations.
The case began after Citizens United, a conservative non-profit organization, sought to air and advertise a film critical of then Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton shortly before the 2008 Democratic primary elections. Broadcasting the film would have been a violation of the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, which prohibited any corporation, non-profit organization or labor union from making an "electioneering communication" within 30 days of a primary or 60 days of an election, or making any expenditure advocating the election or defeat of a candidate at any time. Citizens United challenged the constitutionality of this law, and its case reached the Supreme Court.
In a majority opinion joined by four other justices, Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy held that the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act's prohibition of all independent expenditures by corporations and unions violated the First Amendment's protection of free speech. "
He gets arrested the day before he is due to testify to congress.
How convenient...
A Daily Mail article today reported how his parents, both profs at Stanford, expect to go broke paying for lawyers who will defend their son.
That of course would have been unnecessary if they had given said son lessons in basic morality while raising him.
40 million to Democrats = A-OK! Clean! Good! Kisses from Maxine.
BUT! Only way to give money to the R party is thru dark secret channels.. The left will call this ... ah wait for it... "Citizens Untied"
Even though the Citizens United case was about Free speech.
But back to those secret dark money channels that cannot be proven - how convenient.
There are always surprises, but this has a pretty straightforward feel to it - yet with really, really, really odd personalities in the starring roles.
However, I still think the most interesting/unusual part of the story, might be the role of Dr. Lerner, the coach/physician at FTX / Alameda.
Somebody's working hard to keep that out of the way..
I doubt he took funds to make political donations, since he certainly has to pay the funds he takes back. Where he lost was using customer to make bets on futures and losing the money, and unexpectedly couldn't pay them back.
"secret contributions" Clinton's water closet. Obamacares. Bidencares. Iranian claim. Kiev collusion. Green deal. FTX, too. Democrats, first. GOP of the Americans, second, stripe?
...he donated as much to Republicans as he did to Democrats, but the GOP donations were “dark-money” contributions, making his claim difficult to verify.
Difficult to verify from public records. Easy to verify (that he made dark money contributions) from his bank records. So he could clear this up by releasing those records.
Of course, since the claim is utter bullshit he will do no such thing.
sammy five fingers
Adderall addled man-child
goofy looking prick
Dave Begley: preference period for third parties only 90 days. For insiders like parents, employees a year. Fraudulent transfer another route, but requires proof of wrongdoing on part of transferor. Should be evidence here, but more work.
The list of creditors in the bankruptcy filing has been sealed, so we don't know who gave him all this money to play with. Likely many of them are hedge funds that are now bankrupt themselves. Fortunately, the judge didn't think it was necessary for their investors to know that.
Fraudulent conveyances are recoverable. And political contributions are probably not covered by the BFP rule. No bargained for exchange.
Rich people "misappropriate"
Poor people "steal"
Wonder how Michael Lewis writes his FTX book without revealing he saw the con.
It takes real money if you're going to steal an election.
Both parties are corrupt.
From the moderate middle's 3/5 compromise to the liberals' 1-2 wicked solution with albinophobia expertly paving the progressive path.
"It takes real money if you're going to steal an election."
Yep. Never fight the Fed!
The political contributions are merely a cost of doing business.
Citizens United is about SPEECH - not donations. Certainly it has nothing to do with "secret donations"
CU was an attempt to return the voice to the People and neutralize the dark money redistributed from diverse P.A.C.... corporate, clinical, congruent, Choice, [democratic] collusion, [for-profit] charities, colleges, [Green] climate change, etc.
In the midst of my 9th decade, and somewhere in the misty recesses of my mind, is the belief it's against the "Law" to be the recipient of stolen goods/money? Unless, of course, fraudulent enrichment is not considered "stealing"?
WHAT was Her Skill set? What were Her Techniques?
I would say that it likely involved a tennis ball, and a garden hose, but she's really not that attractive.
Mike D:
Check out California Penal Code §496(c), creating a private right of action for receipt of stolen property including treble damages and attorney fees. Case law says this applies to theft by fraud.
But the Sultry Wood Nymph? She MUST have had some SPECIAL Skills to suck up Her billions..
WHAT was Her Skill set? What were Her Techniques?
@gilbar, steal a few billion dollars and find out.
I feel a modicum of sympathy for him. It's all very well to be a boy genius, but there's not much to recommend being a boy genius if you have to go to jail for the rest of your life.. Madoff got to enjoy decades of being rich and respectable. Harvey molested two generations of movie stars. Even Avenatti, although his moment in the fame bubble was brief, got to spend a considerable portion of his life free to prowl. I bet Stormy fixed him up with some hot porn stars. What did SBF get? A couple of years in the Bahamas in a penthouse and some group sex with some girls who would never get invited to the Playboy Mansion. Crime doesn't pay, but there are bad bargains and worse bargains. SBF might go down as the most unsuccessful billionaire crook of all time.
What evidence did they present the grand jury? Seems like a pretty quick process for the DOJ, given their past history.
The DOJ gets to give the impression they'll act against criminal Democrats (except Hunter and Joe) and at the same time, they lock him away for couple of months to shut him up. A twofer!
He'll never see a day in jail.
I really have no doubt he should have indicted. The fact that he was indicted the day before he was to testify to Congress reflects deep corruption in the DOJ and elsewhere. The only real question if this was an act to protect Democrats or if it was a bipartisan racket.
A country can tolerate a lot of rot, but there does come a point when it is too much. Norms don't mean much when the social compact is broken beyond repair.
Several days ago I posited here the conspiracy theory that this scandal is really all a hit job on crypto currency the purpose of which is to maintain government control of commerce. Well it's not so much theory. Turns out Biden's chairman of the SEC, Gary Gensler, had been meeting with bankman-fried for many months before the collapse, trying to get Bankman-Fried a monopoly on crypto currency exchange instead of making sure he was above board. He was also surreptitiously meeting with George, The Currency Hit Man, Soros and Hillary Clinton, the meeting records of which Gensler illegally scrubbed. This is really, really bad. How low can this administration go? Come on ABC, CBS, CNN, NBC, NYT, WP etc. , get on this stuff you worthless POSes.
If we can't see his alleged dark money donations to Republicans, then we also can't see his dark money contributions to Democrats, which could be even larger than the visible ones, too.
What does it tell us that he gave virtually all his visible contributions to Democrats?
Of course, there is crypto currency lobbying to be done with some fringe libertarian and GOPe grifters, but really, that donor list is essentially all Democrat.
So this is the DNC's shit show. And mommy and daddy's. Why all the sob stories for them? It was literally their profession to understand scams like this. Stanford Law is spinning hard, but at some point the plates fall down.
MikeD: A good thing about clawback statutes is that the mind of the transferee is largely irrelevant. May have to return the funds even if innocent. Law looks at transferee mind. But sometimes transferee defends as good faith purchaser for value.
One of the charges is that he made contributions disguised through others. Like D D'Souza. A lot may come out from these campaign charges.
Post a Comment