Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

justice.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 748 posts

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

#241

Post by astrange »

revscat wrote: post #192
ivraatiems wrote: post #12

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…

Donald Trump did exactly the opposite of your advice at every turn, yet remains free and unindicted. SBF’s main mistake seems to have been not cultivating political clout before committing fraud, not anything related to what he said or did.

Trump's corporations are indicted and he's banned from running charities in New York. He was also impeached twice, which is the same thing as being indicted (and convicted too).

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

#242

Post by gamblor956 »

One thing to note about the charges: a number of these charges are "conspiracy" charges, meaning that there will be more people indicted. Most likely, his ex, who has probably already been talking to the feds in exchange for leniency, and possibly also including his one or both of his parents (see Count 7).

Also interesting to note that Count 8 relates to campaign finance violations (for exceeding contribution thresholds and fraud related to making or reporting contributions). PACs don't have donation thresholds, so this appears to be related to the alleged "dark money" contributions he claimed to make in the summer (rather than the donations to the Democratic PACs in the primaries). It's not clear if this charge is based solely on his claims or if there is actual evidence of improper contributions.

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

#243

Post by astrange »

NaturalPhallacy wrote: post #194
cycrutchfield wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Quoted post unavailable.

They're not "even bigger", they're structured and regulated very differently now.

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

#244

Post by twobitshifter »

IncRnd wrote: post #169
bredren wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

There are so many people who have obtained fortunes and not become drunk on that. The person who built a liquor store and grew into 20 stores across the city. People who started consulting companies. That immigrant family who scraped and scraped for decades while living above their restaurant. The list is endless, especially compared to the much shorter list of crypto criminals who are drunk on their illusory power a…

Liquor stores and consulting companies don't stack up to the “ great fortunes" gp was asking about.

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

#245

Post by Melting_Harps »

ivraatiems wrote: post #12

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.

That was obvious, but some of us who have seen some version of this before have been saying he was going to end up in prison when he entered US political donating/purchasing influence since the beginning of 2022; it was clear where this was all going and the hope was that it would take down all the alt scams, but somehow despite not having any BTC it has taken down the entire cryptocurrency market for no discernible reason.

Its the epitome of contagion effect in practice; and while hindsight is 20/20 I fear that the greatest take away here will be missed because of the ire that has been fomented in the media: insiders will use anything to achieve their largess, that regulation is a loosely held panacea when said insiders use influence and resources to grift.

I think he will get a light sentence, relative to the amount of money that has been lost, like Elizabeth Holmes as he scammed a lot of big players/rich people but it will not be the 2 life sentences that Ross Ulbricht, and that is the real point: we have a multi-tiered judicial system with a very clearly established selective application of the Law.

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

#246

Post by BryantD »

potatototoo99 wrote: post #188
noelsusman wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

His donations to Democrats accounted for 0.025% of all the money Democrats spent on the midterm election last month. Anyone who genuinely believed that can buy you a get out of jail free card for billions of dollars in fraud should seriously re-evaluate how they think the world works.

He donated almost 1bn - that is known of. The Democrats spent about 5bn in the whole election. Do you have a source for your numbers?

I think that given SBF’s assertion that he donated an equal amount of dark money to Republicans, it would be wise to mention the amount of money they spent as well. Otherwise you risk giving the impression that this problem is limited to a single party.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/nov/30/ftx-billi...

I also think the 1 billion figure is inaccurate. In May, SBF said that he could spend a billion between now and 2024. However, he backed away from that quote in October:

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/10/14/sam-bankman-fried-backtracks...

Elon Musk later said that SBF “probably” donated over 1 billion, without providing any supporting evidence. I can’t prove that he’s thinking of the May statement but it seems plausible if not certain. Either way, Elon Musk’s guesses are not proof of anything.

I’m glad you asked for sources. It’s always important to provide them.

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

#247

Post by wmorein »

lisper wrote: post #186
noelsusman wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

His donations to Democrats accounted for 0.025% of all the money Democrats spent on the midterm election last month. Anyone who genuinely believed that can buy you a get out of jail free card for billions of dollars in fraud should seriously re-evaluate how they think the world works.

You're not wrong, but on the other hand... the limit on direct contributions to federal campaigns is $5800. I can tell you from personal experience that this is enough to get a meeting with any senator or congressman except the most senior leadership (their price is about 10x more). So for about $3-4M/yr you can have every incumbent senator and representative on speed dial. They won't necessarily do your bidding, but…

Is this really true? How does it actually work? You donate $5800 then give them a call and ask for a meeting? I assumed that would take a lot more.

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

#248

Post by BryantD »

jiscariot wrote: post #189
comte7092 wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Seeing how thoroughly he convinced people that he had political influence We’ve gotten tot he point where we’ve gone way too far off the deep end when it comes to this narrative around political influence. the collective imagination seems to have risen to comic book level proportions. All people saw was SBF gave a bunch of money and thought, “he must have a ton of influence”. Meanwhile, in my state, he gave $11 mill…

He was the #2 donor behind Soros to Democratic candidates. It's not every day that the number two gets indicted for a multi-billion dollar fraud. It is good to see questions around influence arise.

This is accurate for non-dark money.

Interestingly, if we take SBF at his word that he donated equally to Republicans in dark money, he would be the fifth largest donor to Republican candidates.

https://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/3720141-here-are-the...

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

#249

Post by Spooky23 »

ivraatiems wrote: post #12

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…

The guy is a thief who defrauded millions. His hubris is what got him in this situation.

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

#250

Post by bragr »

boeingUH60 wrote: post #182
noelsusman wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

His donations to Democrats accounted for 0.025% of all the money Democrats spent on the midterm election last month. Anyone who genuinely believed that can buy you a get out of jail free card for billions of dollars in fraud should seriously re-evaluate how they think the world works.

I almost called BS on your statistic, but a simple Google search shows that this year's midterm elections saw spending of up to $16.7 billion [1], so it appears to be true. As a non-US citizen, the amount of money in US politics shreds my mind...what are they even spending it on? Ads? Campaign outreaches? How much do these things cost? If it's how it is in my weird African country (Nigeria), I'll wager that most of t…

Mostly ads, there's a lot of staff too, but the typical campaign salary is pretty paltry and reporting laws limit opportunities for grift.
Post reply on HN