Live data from Hacker News

The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

justice.gov

131–140 of 748 posts

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#131

So 4 counts on wire fraud and then also commodities fraud, securities fraud, money laundering and campaign finance laws. For the moment, if we set aside whether these will be proven, how bad does a stack of charges like this look for him if they are proven?

Quoted post unavailable.

[deleted]

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#132
post #78
post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being extraordinarily connected did not help Madoff much: he was sentenced to 150 years in prison and died there last year.

The cynic in me says that it really does matter who you defraud. Where Madoff went wrong was ripping off other rich people. So, if SBF defrauded more upper- than middle- or working-class folks, then he's screwed.

This is silly. You think the career DOJ prosecutors are looking at the list of victims and only deciding to prosecute if there is a rich person on the list?

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#133

How anyone could look at this man's behavior over the last few weeks and not think he was on a fast track to a federal penitentiary is beyond me. A word to the unwise: If you have done something, anything, that you have a credible reason to believe the United States government thinks is illegal, shut up . Do not do any of the following: * Go on a podcast and talk about it * Go on a Twitter livestream and talk about i…

SBF is a self entitled, privileged prick. He has no concept of infallibility. He is smart and rich so he thinks he will be given a pass

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#134

How anyone could look at this man's behavior over the last few weeks and not think he was on a fast track to a federal penitentiary is beyond me. A word to the unwise: If you have done something, anything, that you have a credible reason to believe the United States government thinks is illegal, shut up . Do not do any of the following: * Go on a podcast and talk about it * Go on a Twitter livestream and talk about i…

> How anyone could look at this man's behavior over the last few weeks and not think he was on a fast track to a federal penitentiary is beyond me Seeing how thoroughly he convinced people that he had political influence, and given his general lack of awareness, I’m willing to give merit to his believing he was immune. Similar to how people outside securities think insider trading is more rampant than it is, insider…

Reminds me of someone or other who committed voting fraud, to prove that it's easy to get away with committing voting fraud, and immediately got caught.

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#135

How anyone could look at this man's behavior over the last few weeks and not think he was on a fast track to a federal penitentiary is beyond me. A word to the unwise: If you have done something, anything, that you have a credible reason to believe the United States government thinks is illegal, shut up . Do not do any of the following: * Go on a podcast and talk about it * Go on a Twitter livestream and talk about i…

> How anyone could look at this man's behavior over the last few weeks and not think he was on a fast track to a federal penitentiary is beyond me Seeing how thoroughly he convinced people that he had political influence, and given his general lack of awareness, I’m willing to give merit to his believing he was immune. Similar to how people outside securities think insider trading is more rampant than it is, insider…

Do we have some examples of people who have amassed great real or perceived fortunes (and power) that have not become drunk on it?

Musk on stage with Chapelle last night, Elizabeth Holmes, or SBF’s whole schtick, who are the ones who have kept their feet on the ground?

What are the attributes of these others who don’t lose themselves in fawning attention and (sometimes short-lived) mountains of capital?

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#136

How anyone could look at this man's behavior over the last few weeks and not think he was on a fast track to a federal penitentiary is beyond me. A word to the unwise: If you have done something, anything, that you have a credible reason to believe the United States government thinks is illegal, shut up . Do not do any of the following: * Go on a podcast and talk about it * Go on a Twitter livestream and talk about i…

Both of his parents are in law too. Like, you'd think he'd know enough to not say anything.

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#138

Can we discus recovery? The Madoff trustee was able to recover something like 90% of the Madoff Ponzi. Alameda and FTX's real estate purchases have value, as do their VC investments, purchases of bank stock, etc. In other words, it's not all gone. My understanding is that even some of the political contributions can be clawed back. FTX's purchases of IOU's (i.e., crypto) that declined in value are not likely to be re…

I’d be absolutely shocked if more than 25% can be recovered. They spent multi-billions on venture investments that were not just high-risk due to their early stage nature but also inextricably linked to ftx by way of the cryptocurrency market as a whole and thus about as undiversified as humanly possible. There’s a few of their investments that have value and value could be recovered through sales but almost all of them are illiquid and have seen valuations collapse.

Also consider that a lot of the players involved are overseas and anonymous* which makes it much more difficult to clawback relative to people onshore (like in the case of madoff).

Re: The United States of America vs. Samuel Bankman-Fried Indictment [pdf]

#140
post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Last interview. Some pressure applied here... https://unusualwhales.com/sbf-interview

In this last interview, he talks about how several customers had negative balances on the platform due to margin trading. According to the SEC's civil suit, the only customer that had a negative balance was Alameda.

They blatantly were doing all sorts of illegal stuff with Alameda-they had god-mode (no liqs) and probably could see and snipe other peoples stops.
Post reply on HN