Similar case in Australia where they bought a company that already had a financial services license: https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/nov/23/ftx-b...
FTX’s ownership of a U.S. bank raises questions
131–140 of 226 posts
Re: FTX’s ownership of a U.S. bank raises questions
#132https://www.wsj.com/articles/sam-bankman-fried-ftx-team-amon... FTX and it's executives donated $70 million to politicians as well (in the last 18 months). SBF donated $40MM to Democrats, and a different executive donated $23MM to Republicans. They were trying to buy all kinds of influence.
Let's hear what Ken Griffin has to say about the GOP receiving FTX money.
>Let's hear what Ken Griffin has to say about the GOP receiving FTX money.
Did the GOP directly profit from those donations or did it go to a specific PAC to support the campaign of a specific politician who a had personal connection to FTX Digital Markets co-CEO Salame? There is a report that suggests the latter[0].
[0]https://www.theblock.co/post/160714/crypto-booster-michelle-...
Re: FTX’s ownership of a U.S. bank raises questions
#133Earlier quoted context omitted.
> What is the definition of violence? You've already conceded that words can hurt people (Alex Jones), so why are you trying to backpedal that now?
Are you suggesting that if any words can harm people, all words must be considered harmful?
I'm saying Bankman-Fried has hurt a few orders of magnitude more people than Alex Jones, and allowing him to give interviews and flippantly defend himself is going to cause a lot of emotional trauma.
Re: FTX’s ownership of a U.S. bank raises questions
#134From the article: “The chairman of FBH is Jean Chalopin, who, along with being a co-creator of cartoon cop Inspector Gadget in the 1980s, is the chairman of Deltec Bank, which, like FTX, is based in the Bahamas. Deltec’s best-known client is Tether, a crypto company with $65 billion in assets offering a stablecoin that is pegged to the dollar.” That tells you everything you need to know.
That absolutely does not tell me everything I need to know. How the hell does the creator of inspector gadget end up mixed in this insanity?
Re: FTX’s ownership of a U.S. bank raises questions
#135I looked into this. They used to do business as Geniome Bank, and their job ads are for "crypto and marijuana". Almost no publicity, though they sponsored a few marijuana events. Chalopin usually shies away from press, so his personal involvement is odd. His son is also the chief digital officer of the company. Another curiosity is the old Farmington team is still there, including the presdient, and they still appear…
Oh, joy.
Looking at the Internet Archive's copy of "moonstonebank.com" from before the crash:
CEO: Ron Oliveira. There's a new CEO now.
Lots of crypto-related material.
Most useful links end at "Request Early Access" or "Contact Us". It doesn't look like they really wanted customers.
> Could have been part of a larger plan which collapsed with FTX.
Unclear. The bank may have been used by FTX in some way. But it looks like tying it into the FTX empire in a way visible to customers didn't happen.
Re: FTX’s ownership of a U.S. bank raises questions
#136My question is why the NY times is still running a summit where SBF is currently still scheduled to speak.
[deleted]
Re: FTX’s ownership of a U.S. bank raises questions
#137Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unavoidable now because of the Citizens United court decision. Of course it's bad, but what are you gonna do?
I don’t know, it’s not this prevalent everywhere so it is possible.
Yes, it is possible to amend the US Constitution to carve out an explicit exception in the 1st Amendment for political donations. So far Congress hasn't made a serious effort to do so.
Re: FTX’s ownership of a U.S. bank raises questions
#138Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not discounting any of the stuff that FTX has done or will come to light, but this practice of supporting “both sides” is a very common, by-the-book strategy for any special interest group or organization looking to buy influence and is flushed with money.
I’m still baffled that this kind of corruption isn’t frowned upon more. People are buying influence. How is that supposed to be OK or normal?
I think it’s frowned upon by many. It’s extremely challenging to address since Citizens United made it legal, and the courts have chipped away at efforts to make it more transparent.
I’m absolutely unhappy with the result. We legalized bribery and rank corruption. It’s awful for the system.
What do you think it’s not frowned upon?
Re: FTX’s ownership of a U.S. bank raises questions
#139Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m still baffled that this kind of corruption isn’t frowned upon more. People are buying influence. How is that supposed to be OK or normal?
Unavoidable now because of the Citizens United court decision. Of course it's bad, but what are you gonna do?
Band together with other citizens and demand an end of this! Also since we're at it corporations aren't persons. The founders of the US were very vocal about giving power to the people, the laws were never intended to grant personhood to legal entities for the purpose of enabling unlimited political lobbying by their wealthy owners.
Re: FTX’s ownership of a U.S. bank raises questions
#140My question is why the NY times is still running a summit where SBF is currently still scheduled to speak.
Perhaps so that he will come to the US so he can be arrested here?