No, Sam Bankman Fried Will Not Be Saved by the Democrats
Yesterday, July 27, 2023, we learned a valuable lesson about the dangers of disinformation. Social media exploded with news of the changes to the criminal charges against Sam Bankman Fried, the disgraced co-founder of FTX. However, influential figures misrepresented these changes - sometimes with the clear intention of promoting a conspiracy and partisan narrative.
This narrative has been circulating since the collapse of FTX. It stated that Sam Bankman Fried was a puppet of the Biden administration and that he “got off scot-free” because he had friends in high places.
It is clear that Bankman-Fried will not get away with this. Bankman-Fried still faces a number of charges that will go to trial in October. Prosecutors are likely to continue to press charges of campaign finance. In June, similar procedural problems led to another indictment, including bank fraud charges, being dismissed. However, those charges were soon revived in a separate trial scheduled for March 2024. Prosecutors are expected to seek a similar reconsideration of the campaign finance charge in March.
These easy-to-google facts haven’t deterred political influencers like right-wing blogger Ian Miles Cheong and The Intercept co-founder Glen Greenwald turns a flawed assumption into political red meat. Vivek Ramaswamy, a Republican candidate for office in California, followed suit and criticized the “corrupt” Justice Department.
She and other pundits used her mischaracterizations of events to promote the connection between FTX and the Democrats. This politicized portrayal of the right has increased since the collapse of FTX – but in fairness there are many signs of systemic corruption in US political life that go beyond one young man’s shell game.
Many of the assumptions connecting Sam Bankman Fried to the Democratic Party are incorrect, including the notion that he is a partisan Democratic contributor. Conspiracy theorists who use false premises to reduce this complex reality to a partisan conflict are actually helping the corrupt elites they claim to be fighting.
What happened?
It’s important to note that the campaign finance allegations against Sam Bankman Fried are unlikely to go away.
AskFX reported that they were excluded from the collection process in October. If prosecutors linked the campaign finance allegations to the March trial, it would put Bankman-Fried at greater risk.
Two separate trials mean two separate juries. The second jury could focus on campaign finance and bank fraud allegations while leaving Bankman-Fried’s complex embezzlements and frauds to the A-Team.
Yesterday’s jury reshuffle could have made it *more* likely that he would be convicted on campaign finance charges, not less. Additionally, a second trial reduces the likelihood that certain parts of the sentence can be served at the same time, which could increase his overall time in prison.
You wouldn’t have known about it if you listened to figures like Ian Miles Cheong. Cheong’s tweet about yesterday’s event is a perfect example of how the line between incompetence and deception can blur. His tweet appeared to imply that Bankman Fried had been acquitted of all charges, including campaign finance charges.
The comments on the post show that Bankman-Fried’s supporters think he was released and that it was his Democratic donations that made him eligible for this (nonexistent) release card.
Ironically, the belief that “the Democrats” did it is based on the lies of Sam Bankman Fried.
The master con artist maintained his media image by claiming that he was motivated by a desire to save humanity (in fact, he was driven to buy a luxury island for friends). This carefully crafted image included his announcement that he would donate $1 billion to Democratic politicians during the 2024 election.
I counted it carefully and it was a lie at least 4 times.
Sam Bankman Fried never had the money to give or the chance to get there. Even before the scam was discovered, Sam Bankman-Fried returned his $1 billion sum, which he apparently made up because it sounded nice. Third, Bankman Fried later admitted that his commitment to “effective altruism,” an ideology (already corrupted and broken), was a lie.
The fourth lie is that Sam Bankman Fried was a Democrat. In fact, he donated stolen funds to both Republicans and Democrats. He never wanted to re-elect Joe Biden, but wanted to curry favor with politicians from both parties in order to achieve favorable regulations.
Bankman-Fried wanted to hide his illegal donations to Conservatives. To maintain his public reputation as a nice, (neo)liberal man, he made the donations through FTX employees posing as donors.
The partisan interpretation of the FTX affair as a Democratic Party operation is pernicious because it hides the truth that political parties are just strategic playthings for the rich and powerful in America.
Sam Bankman Fried and his clique pose a threat not because they are political, but because they have no real values beyond their own. Bankman-Fried’s willingness to work with both sides of the political spectrum is why making his case a political pawn is dangerous and misguided.
