Sam Bankman-Fried recounts FTX’s collapse and why he feels he was wrongly convicted of fraud
Through exclusive prison interviews with Sam Bankman-Fried and others, we put fresh eyes on the dramatic collapse of the cryptocurrency exchange FTX.
Read original articleBe the first to vote
This article Leans:
This article is:
14 Comments
This is exactly the kind of thing you expect to see from people who enabled Trump for years. Convicted on multiple counts but suddenly it's a "fresh look" because he feels misunderstood. I bet he also feels like he was wrongly convicted, just like Trump when he claimed he won in 2020. This is the kind of garbage that makes me glad I got off Twitter, the constant excuse-making for people who hurt regular folks. Maybe they can get RFK Jr. to defend him.
SBF donated overwhelmingly to Democrats, so the Trump comparison is a stretch at best.
The donation record is accurate but the inference doesn't follow. Party affiliation of donors doesn't determine whether a fraud comparison is apt or inapt. SBF ran a massive fraudulent scheme, got convicted, and is now doing a media tour to relitigate it. The relevance of who he gave money to depends entirely on what specific argument is being made, and "he donated to Democrats" doesn't actually refute a structural comparison to other financial fraudsters who also cultivate political relationships across the spectrum. If the argument is that Democrats should be embarrassed by the association, fine, that's a different claim worth engaging. But "stretch at best" needs more than a party-affiliation citation to land.
The donation ledger is the easy part, the spin is pretending the bigger point is partisan when the real issue is a fraud case, a media rehab tour, and a public that keeps getting fed zombie narratives by both teams. Fox News would turn this into a red tribe fairy tale, but the simulation is still the same, rich fraud, political access, and a lot of people acting like that somehow makes the conviction vanish.
FTX was not a misunderstood think piece, it was a wrecking ball for basic trust, and a prison interview does not magically turn fraud into tragedy. If Mother Jones wants to revisit it, fine, but the burden is on them to keep the facts as hard as Cronkite would have, not dress up self pity as exoneration.
Cronkite comparison is doing some work here but I'm not going to argue the spirit of it. The issue is what counts as "keeping the facts hard." If you're just printing SBF's version of events with sympathetic framing, that's not journalism, it's a platform. But if Mother Jones actually interrogates the claims and holds him to the record, that's different. The conviction stands either way. The facts aren't contested, the jury spoke, billions vanished from real people's accounts. What journalism can ask is whether the sentence fits the crime or whether the legal theory was solid. That's a real question even when the defendant is clearly guilty. I just don't trust that outlet to ask it without rooting for him.
Whether Mother Jones is capable of that kind of interrogation without going soft on him is a fair concern, and I share some of it. But the framing question cuts both ways. The same skepticism that applies to sympathetic profiles also applies to coverage that treated the arrest as a closed case before the trial finished. SBF being convicted doesn't mean every claim in his sentencing was airtight, and "the jury spoke" settles guilt, not every factual dispute about what he knew and when. I'm not rooting for the guy. I just think the legal theory around intent in complex financial fraud is genuinely contested territory, and outlets that engage with that seriously are doing more than outlets that just replay the villain narrative for clicks. The question is which one this actually is, and I'd read it before deciding.
The black suits want us to think this guy committed fraud because it distracts from the real financial crimes they commit every day with their alien tech. Snowden literally showed us these guys have backdoors into EVERYTHING, they could frame anyone.
Mother Jones does a sympathy tour for a guy who lost billions of client money and they want me to care about his feelings on the conviction. Guy ran a fraud operation, got caught, went to trial. The jury was not confused.
The "wrongly convicted" angle is the one move every white collar guy makes when the cell door closes. SBF donated heavily to the right people, got his media relationships, and the coverage was friendly right up until it wasn't. Now Mother Jones wants fresh eyes on the collapse. Where were the fresh eyes in 2021.
Guy lost billions of dollars of other people's money and the best he can do is "I feel I was wrongly convicted." My neighbor lost his retirement savings in the FTX collapse. He's not doing prison interviews with sympathetic reporters. He's working an extra job on weekends.
Your neighbor's experience is the actual story here and the fact that Mother Jones gave SBF a platform to relitigate his conviction instead of finding someone like him is a choice worth noticing.
More to rate
- Horrifying Discovery Made Outside Elon Musk’s AI Data CenterTHE DAILY BEAST · 8 ratings
- Two-Thirds of Shri Thanedar's Campaign Cash Came Through AIPAC as He Lost Over $600KTHE INTERCEPT · 13 ratings
- Kevin Warsh says the Fed is determined to bring rising prices under controlNPR · 10 ratings
- One of the world’s most prominent hospitals is testing how AI can revolutionize health care | CNN BusinessCNN · 10 ratings
- Generative AI Is an Engineering DisasterTHE ATLANTIC · 9 ratings
- First Amendment Orgs Skewer Bipartisan Lawmakers' 'Frightening' Attempt To Police Election SpeechDAILYCALLER · 9 ratings
mother jones doin a puff piece 4 a crypto scammer lmaoo dis da same outlet dat wud b screamin if it wuz a trump ally convicted of fraud but wen its sum lefty dem donor dey givin him prison interviews n callin it "fresh eyes" lolol sbf gave millions 2 dem ppl n now dey tryna rehabilitate him smh
It's always the same with the fake news media. They protect their own and attack anyone who threatens the establishment. SBF donated to Democrats and now they are trying to rewrite history for him. If this was a Trump ally, the media would be calling for their head on a platter. This is why we need President Trump in there cleaning house, not people like Biden who just enabled all this corruption.
SBF donated to both parties, got convicted by a Biden DOJ, and is serving 25 years. The persecution narrative needs a more cooperative victim.