Uh Oh. Democrat Liability Bankman Arrested

Bankman-Fried helped to bankroll President Joe Biden’s 2020 campaign and threw nearly $40 million behind Democratic candidates this year, and we have a feeling that questioning from Republican lawmakers would’ve been embarrassing for the Democratic Party. His testimony under oath would also have, presumably, been a boon for prosecutors who decided to arrest him on Monday instead. The timing is puzzling.

I think it’s becoming clear this arrest was to prevent him from answering questions/silencing that might uncover just how much democrats had gain from him.

We are talking about SDNY…Branch of FBI political operatives.

The timing of this is extremely suspicious…and we all know how libs work/operate.

2 Likes

He certainly couldn’t keep his mouth shut, and everything he said in interviews etc. would be used in court. Pretty sure he wouldn’t moderate what he said to an interviewer and yes, some people certainly don’t want some of that info out there.

I mean look at how certain people are trying to equate $262,000 to $40 million? Yeah, that’s EXACTLY the same. lol

2 Likes

the amounts are vastly different but should the justifications used for taking the money be the same regardless of amount?

If the conservative position is that dems who took money are scared… wouldn’t that apply to republicans who took money as well?

RT did say.

1 Like

So…now that we know that the money was stolen, when do the politicians return it so it can be distributed to the victims?

2 Likes

Is that how victims are repaid in other fraud cases? I would guess that unless the politician knew the money they received was stolen, they would not be responsible for paying damages.

These are not damages, these are returning money that was never theirs. Stolen money stays stolen money when it is transferred.

If you bought a stolen car but did not know it was stolen you would still have to give it back.

2 Likes

If I spent it and didn’t know it was stolen?

Actually he wanted regulation. Still does as far as I know.
From SBF to CZ to Michael Saylor to Shark Tank’s Kevin O’Leary
all the major crypto whales want regulation.

Regulation will legitimize crytpo and cause billions to pour into it. That is exactly what they want.

Would I?

If so, then I would be owed damages from the defendant.

1 Like

You can’t donate what isn’t yours.
If someone gives stolen money to a friend or charity, it still belongs to the person it was stolen from.
I assume whoever handles the bankruptcy will go after it.
If Politicians want to argue they should keep it because they would be harmed if they give it back, let them try that. That will be a good look.

2 Likes

Hey @PurpnGold ! You missed one.

2 Likes

I did miss this since what she said wasn’t in the same post I responded to. Thanks for highlighting

1 Like

Is that why he wrote a manifesto about a self regulated market?

https://www.ftxpolicy.com/posts/possible-digital-asset-industry-standards

Also can i ask ya - how come you post pics of links and not links. Just wondering. Your prerogative of course.

How about that 'pology?

1 Like

Anyone who sits there and declares rising crime in NYC as Republican spin clearly can’t do a conspiracy correctly. :wink:

1 Like

Yea so who is claiming different? Will you get it is totally different.

Your link shows that SBF supports crypto regulation

I read about two sentences into YOUR link and came across

while waiting for full federal regulatory regimes.

That accompanies SBF’s pro-regulation tweet below,
and (below that)
a snippet from a Coingeek.com article outlining that SBF supported and
lobbied FOR crypto regulation.

Ya know what the nuclear power industry wants the most?
Congress to legitimize nuclear power by providing a set of regulations by which they can continue and expand.

Ya know what the fracking industry wants the most?
Same thing, but for fracking.

You know what the crypto industry wants the most?
.
.

https://twitter.com/SBF_FTX/status/1582835490515927041?s=20&t=-xXOLnGN5X2thqlbMldxSg

1 Like