Cryptocurrency billionaire broke the bank for Dems

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  s  •  2 weeks ago  •  89 comments

Cryptocurrency billionaire broke the bank for Dems

One can only wonder why this isn't as big a political scandal as Enron....


S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



Amid all the jubilation and gloating by Joe Biden, Chuck Schumer and pals over the Democrats’ better-than-expected showing in the midterms comes a disturbing story that may explain something about how they won such a curious election.

Biden’s second-biggest donor, cryptocurrency billionaire wunderkind Sam Bankman-Fried, a k a SBF, saw his business file for bankruptcy days after the election, but not before pumping $40 million into the Democratic Party to spend on “get-out-the-vote” and other shadowy ballot-harvesting mechanics for the midterms.

The shambolic 30-year-old whiz kid, once said to have been worth $16 billion, had spent $10 million helping get Biden elected in 2020.

SBF’s mother, Stanford law professor Barbara Fried, also is co-founder of left-wing political action committee Mind The Gap, which has raised a reported $140 million to help Democrats win elections through the same “get-out-the-vote” grift.

A more unlikely billionaire you could not find — and of course his money was built on thin air. A math genius with poor social skills, SBF reportedly lived in a “polycule” — a polyamorous relationship with multiple people — in a luxury penthouse with about 10 co-workers in the tax haven of the Bahamas, where his collapsed crypto exchange FTX was headquartered.

Otherwise, he was sleeping on beanbags in his office, eating vegan fries and, according to his own Twitter feed, popping amphetamines and sleeping pills to regulate his chaotic sleeping habits.

Now Reuters is reporting that between $1 billion and $2 billion of customer funds have vanished from FTX, conveniently after the Democrats safely spent his money.

At last report, SBF and his mysterious co-founder, Gary Wang, were being held “under supervision” by Bahamian authorities after reportedly planning to flee to Dubai, according to fintech publication Cointelegraph.

It is a stunning fall to earth. The financial media and big investors have feted the young billionaire as a saint who shunned earthly pleasures like Lamborghinis and Rolexes, but lived only to give away all his money and make the world a better place.

He was the most famous millennial adherent of a cult known as “Effective Altruism,” which originated at Oxford University, found fertile ground in Silicon Valley — and now has gone down in flames along with him.

EA is a disguised form of socialism, because all the “good” that is done just happens to match up perfectly with the left’s obsessions, whether climate change, social justice, equity, banning meat or his favorite, “pandemic preparedness.”

In a Nas Daily online video, an awkward Bankman-Fried was featured this year as a role model of altruism for young people: “Sam is not a traditional billionaire because he believes in the concept of ‘earn to give’ … Next decade he will probably give away more than $10 million … He wants to get rich in order to impact the world and change it.”

SBF certainly “impacted” the midterms, funneling his millions into the Democratic National Committee and Democrat-friendly PACs such as Protect Our Future and Guarding Against Pandemics.

He donated to committees aligned with Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer to help Democrats win races.

He lavished his largesse on “pro-crypto Democrats” like New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, who was sponsoring a bill to lock the Securities and Exchange Commission out of regulating the crypto market.

He also visited the White House, meeting with top Biden adviser Steve Ricchetti on April 22 and May 12, according to the Washington Free Beacon.

No wonder the Biden administration has been weak on regulating the crypto market. It was the goose that laid the golden egg.

Meanwhile, the media massaged his profile.

Both Forbes and Fortune had him on the cover. “The next Warren Buffett?” asked Fortune.
Never mind that the actual Warren Buffett consistently ripped SBF’s product, cryptocurrency, as worthless.

“It draws in a lot of charlatans,” said Buffett, “where people who are of less-than-stellar character see an opportunity to clip people who are trying to get rich because their neighbor is getting rich buying this stuff that neither one of them understand. It will come to a bad end.”

But what would he know.

SBF appeared with Bill Clinton and Tony Blair at international crypto summits, and with Tom Brady in glitzy TV ads and social media videos.

Larry David did a big Super Bowl ad for FTX, all designed to trick unsuspecting Americans into losing their shirts on what was quite simply a Ponzi scheme.

“I’m all in. Are you?” said the celebrities.

Another “altruistic” venture by SBF was having FTX back a cryptocurrency donation website launched by the Ukrainian government. There wasn’t a woke cause he didn’t hit.

The sinister neo-socialists at the World Economic Forum (WEF) loved SBF so much, they made FTX a “corporate partner” — but that page on the WEF website has vanished in the last 48 hours, leaving an error message.

Venture capital firm Sequoia was a big backer, investing over $200 million in SBF, a lot of which he then invested back in Sequoia, whose chairman and managing partner Michael Moritz is a big donor to the Dems as well as to anti-Trump hate group the Lincoln Project, and reportedly is a neighbor of Nancy Pelosi in San Francisco.

Six weeks ago, Sequoia hired a freelance writer, Adam Fisher, to write a puff piece on SBF, depicting him as a “future trillionaire …  I don’t know how I know, I just do. SBF is a winner … I couldn’t shake the feeling that this guy is actually as selfless as he claims to be.”

The article, which was replaced on Sequoia’s website over the weekend with a somber note to investors, describes how SBF wowed Seqouia’s partners into giving him $1 billion during a Zoom meeting throughout which he played multiplayer online video game League of Legends.

“I LOVE THIS FOUNDER,” typed one partner.

“I am a 10 out of 10,” pinged another.

“YES!!!” exclaimed a third.

Fisher visited Bankman-Fried in the Bahamas, describing a man who does not make eye contact, plays video games all day and is constantly plugged into his computer with a headset. All his meetings are by Zoom — with people in the same room.

The author concludes that the FTX founder is “neurodiverse,” but not “spectrum-y or Asperger-y.” SBF says he has “some ADD,” and never has read a book, as information should be in “a six-paragraph blog post.”

The article describes Bankman-Fried’s recruitment into the EA cult when he was a young man at MIT as being “nerd-sniped,” which is “the practice of attracting brainpower by presenting problems as puzzles.”

In other words, SBF’s analytical IQ and social ineptitude made him a prime recruit for the cause of hijacking capitalism to divert money to left-wing causes.

Like Greta Thunberg, the teenage eco-evangelist, SBF was manipulated into serving a useful purpose.

In his case, it was money made from nothing that arrived in Democratic coffers at exactly the right time.

The very least the Democratic Party should do is refund the $40 million to the people who were ripped off by their crypto benefactor.


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
1  seeder  Sean Treacy    2 weeks ago

As Ben Shapiro wrote:

"The story of SBF isn't just a Fyre Festival doc. It's about his bluewashing -- massive donations to Democrats, associations with WEF, push for "stakeholder capitalism" -- in order to draw regulations that benefitted him, and to create associations that protected him."

He was the second leading donor to democrats in 2022.  

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.1  Vic Eldred  replied to  Sean Treacy @1    2 weeks ago
massive donations to Democrats

They've had a lot of money to play with.

 
 
 
evilgenius
Professor Guide
2  evilgenius    2 weeks ago

Don't the Republicans look foolish now for not supporting the effort to limit (or outright ban) outside money? 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
2.1  seeder  Sean Treacy  replied to  evilgenius @2    2 weeks ago

Republicans look foolish now for not supporting the effort to limit (or outright ban) outside money? 

Do principles mater? Or just winning? 

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
Professor Participates
2.1.1  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Sean Treacy @2.1    2 weeks ago
Do principles mater? Or just winning?

After blocking Garlands nomination then rushing through ACB Republicans have proven they have no principles and winning is all that matters. This seed is one LONG whine-fest that doesn't actually prove anyone did anything wrong. Rich guy donates to Democrats, big fucking deal. The only thing that this seed makes clear is how jealous Republicans are for that money, they're not mad about 'principles', they're mad because they wish that money had gone to them. This would be a piece about how the MSM and deep state are trying to ruin conservative entrepreneur's by tanking his crypto business if he'd been giving millions to Republicans.

 
 
 
evilgenius
Professor Guide
2.1.2  evilgenius  replied to  Sean Treacy @2.1    2 weeks ago
Do principles mater? Or just winning? 

Idk, do principles matter? They don't for current Republicans. So why hold the other side to standards you don't hold your own people to? I worst I see here are the Dems being hypocrites. It isn't the first time and it won't be the last. Conservatives whining about it after they went to court to expand the practice is the height of hypocrisy. 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
2.1.3  seeder  Sean Treacy  replied to  evilgenius @2.1.2    2 weeks ago
, do principles matter? They don't for current Republicans

I guess you don't understand your own point. 

They don't "look foolish" because they oppose the ban on outside money on principle.

 
 
 
evilgenius
Professor Guide
2.1.4  evilgenius  replied to  Sean Treacy @2.1.3    2 weeks ago
They don't "look foolish" because they oppose the ban on outside money on principle.

If the right wing populists (and their current appeasers in Congress) had any principle they would have fought to uphold the bi-partisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002. They indeed look foolish because the monster they made came back to bite them on the ass.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
2.2  Ronin2  replied to  evilgenius @2    2 weeks ago

Don't Democrats look like Fascists for taking this money?

Winning above all else for the Fascist Dems.

 
 
 
evilgenius
Professor Guide
2.2.1  evilgenius  replied to  Ronin2 @2.2    2 weeks ago
Don't Democrats look like Fascists for taking this money?

No. Taking donation money from a rich guy isn't even close to fascism. 

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
Professor Participates
2.2.2  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Ronin2 @2.2    2 weeks ago
Don't Democrats look like Fascists Fascist Dems.

"The lady doth protest too much, methinks..."

I find it hilarious that rightwing conservatives claim the 'left' are both communists and fascists. This proves they have no fucking clue what either actually mean. Saying someone is a communist and a fascist is like saying the weather outside is a gusty dead calm. The two are at opposite ends of the spectrum from each other which is why anyone with more than half a brain knows fascism is 'rightwing' ideology.

While communism is a system based around a theory of economic equality and advocates for a classless society, fascism is a nationalistic, top-down system with rigid class roles that is ruled by an all-powerful dictator.

Communism vs Fascism - Difference and Comparison | Diffen

Fascism  is a  far-right authoritarian ultranationalist  political  ideology  and  movement ,  characterized by a  dictatorial  leader, centralized  autocracy militarism , forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of  individual interests  for the perceived good of the nation and race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy.

Fascism - Wikipedia

Trumpism is a far-right authoritarian , white nationalist  political  ideology  and  movement , characterized by a wannabe dictatorial leader named Donald Trump, centralized autocracy where elections only count if the dictator wins militarism , forcible suppression of opposition like suggesting the stripping of media licenses for media that doesn't show the dictator in a favorable light, belief in a natural "white conservative Christian" social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests and equality for the perceived good of the Christian nation and white race, and strong regimentation of society stripping citizens of their right to privacy and bodily autonomy and controlling the economy by giving massive subsidies to oil and gas along with huge tax breaks to the top 1% and multinational corporations.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
2.2.3  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @2.2.2    2 weeks ago
I find it hilarious that rightwing conservatives claim the 'left' are both communists and fascists. This proves they have no fucking clue what either actually mean.

I  think that at least for the 20th Century versions, they were two sides of the  same totalitarian coin.  Fascism and communism were also two variants of statism.  People's work and life belongs to the state and that the state may do with it what it will. Both are forms of dictatorship. Neither one recognizes individual rights nor permits individual freedom. The differences are really non-essential.

Keep on laughing DP, everybody has something that they are good at.

 
 
 
evilgenius
Professor Guide
2.2.4  evilgenius  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @2.2.3    2 weeks ago
I  think that at least for the 20th Century versions, they were two sides of the  same totalitarian coin.

Too many posters don't have a clue what the different political ideologies are, but continue to bandy terms around like they mean something. Words have meaning and if posters are just going to substitute duly elected official with fascist because they lost an election they lose all credibility. And deservedly so.

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
Professor Participates
2.2.5  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @2.2.3    2 weeks ago
they were two sides of the same totalitarian coin

Nope.

Both are forms of dictatorship.

Wrong again.

The differences are really non-essential.

Only if you believe facts are non-essential. Sure, some might claim hot and cold are two sides of the same coin, but just like how a head and tail are on opposite ends, communism and fascism are polar opposites of each other. Now I'm not advocating for either, liberals and progressives are neither fascists nor communists, I'm simply pointing out how fucking looney one would have to be to believe the two ideologies are somehow compatible.

Keep on laughing DP

Well, many rightwing conservative posters continue to provide endless comedy by regularly making fools of themselves, so your request is easily fulfilled.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
2.2.6  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @2.2.5    2 weeks ago
communism and fascism are polar opposites of each other. 

Capitalism is the polar opposite of communism.  Democracy is the polar opposite of fascism. 

I'm simply pointing out how fucking looney one would have to be to believe the two ideologies are somehow compatible

Exactly, who could ever view Stalin or Xi or Kim Jong-un as fascists.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Masters Quiet
2.2.7  Jack_TX  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @2.2.2    2 weeks ago
Trumpism is a far-right authoritarian , white nationalist  political  ideology  and  movement

Tell us specifically what laws were passed or XO's adopted while Trump was president that were white nationalist.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Masters Quiet
2.2.8  Jack_TX  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @2.2.5    2 weeks ago
communism and fascism are polar opposites of each other.

*sigh*

I'm simply pointing out how fucking looney one would have to be to believe the two ideologies are somehow compatible.

Joseph Stalin says hello.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.2.9  Texan1211  replied to  Jack_TX @2.2.7    2 weeks ago
Tell us specifically what laws were passed or XO's adopted while Trump was president that were white nationalist.

chirping-intensifies-memegenerator-net-chirping-intensifies-cricket-meme-generator-52901154.png

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
3  Ender    2 weeks ago

Another deep state conspiracy....

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
3.1  Ronin2  replied to  Ender @3    2 weeks ago

Another denier of Democrat Fascism.

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
3.1.1  Ender  replied to  Ronin2 @3.1    2 weeks ago

Hahaha

Show me where the dems broke the law by accepting donations....

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
3.1.2  JBB  replied to  Ronin2 @3.1    2 weeks ago

original

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
3.1.3  seeder  Sean Treacy  replied to  Ender @3.1.1    2 weeks ago
how me where the dems broke the law by accepting donations....

such high standards. 

Does it feel good to defend your party  taking millions from someone who defrauded Americans of billions? 

I do enjoy the whipsawing from "What Trump did is a disgrace even if its not illegal" to "who cares, it's not illegal!"   [deleted]

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
3.1.4  JBB  replied to  Ender @3.1.1    2 weeks ago

The last thing the gop would do is to ban and outlaw huge shady contributions...

Theirs!

They will happily make it illegal for Dems!

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
3.1.5  Ender  replied to  Sean Treacy @3.1.3    2 weeks ago

It must feel good to complain about basically nothing.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
3.1.6  seeder  Sean Treacy  replied to  Ender @3.1.5    2 weeks ago
It must feel good to complain about basically nothing.

Lol.  This is what keeps me coming back here.

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
3.1.7  Ender  replied to  Sean Treacy @3.1.6    2 weeks ago

Show me where anything was illegal.

Hell I have been saying all along anyone that invests in crypto currency' is an idiot.

I notice if there was wrong doing on the 'founders' you all are only using that as a wedge issue against the dems.

Not one word about Tom Brady defrauding people, only how one man gave money to dem causes...

The fake outrage is easily readable.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.8  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ender @3.1.7    2 weeks ago
Show me where anything was illegal.

You really need someone to show you the difference between right and wrong?

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
3.1.9  Ender  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.8    2 weeks ago

So basically this whole outrage is nothing but feelings....

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.10  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ender @3.1.9    2 weeks ago

People were scammed of $40 Million. That's just for openers.

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
3.1.11  Ender  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.10    2 weeks ago
In June 2021, during the bullish days of crypto, the seven-time Super Bowl champion and his then-wife, Gisele Bündchen, said they had closed an equity deal with both FTX.com and FTX.US (legally, separate entities). The deal would see Brady become a brand ambassador for the exchange and Bündchen an environmental and social initiatives adviser.

Where is the outrage against him?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.12  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ender @3.1.11    2 weeks ago

You need to point to something else?

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
3.1.13  Ender  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.12    2 weeks ago

So in other words, you are just going to completely ignore that Brady was a part of the company...

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.14  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ender @3.1.13    2 weeks ago

In other words you can't admit that what SBF did was wrong.

It is now a matter of record.

Have a good one.

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
3.1.15  Ender  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.14    2 weeks ago

Nope. I never said whether it is right or wrong.

I think all crypto currency is a scam yet you would rather jump to conclusions while only having laser focus blame.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
3.1.16  seeder  Sean Treacy  replied to  Ender @3.1.7    2 weeks ago
Show me where anything was illegal.

I get it. That's your standard.  

You think what Donald Trump did on Jan 6th is basically nothing too, I'm sure. 

he fake outrage is easily readable.

I see the problem. I'm not a corporatist, so I don't think its a great idea that corporations, particularly criminal ones that defraud people of billions, purchase influence and write the legislation that is designed to regulate them. But Mussolini was popular and millions today still believe in mega corporations working hand in hand with governments to rule  countries so Is shouldn't be surprised Democrats so happily defend this fraudster. So I understand why you think it's perfectly acceptable for this criminal to work with Democrats to protect himself and his ponzi scheme, even if I don't agree with it.  

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
3.1.17  Ender  replied to  Sean Treacy @3.1.16    2 weeks ago

Please. You don't think the right wing is not run by corporations and mega pacs.

The Koch brothers, the heritage foundation....

You are only calling out one side when both play those games. So yes I only see partisan blathering here.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
3.1.18  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Ender @3.1.17    2 weeks ago
The Koch brothers

David Koch died three years ago.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
3.1.19  seeder  Sean Treacy  replied to  Ender @3.1.17    2 weeks ago
 So yes I only see partisan blathering here.

As you defend a Madoff level fraudster financing your party....

gonna take a lot of showers to wash that grime off.

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
3.1.20  Ender  replied to  Sean Treacy @3.1.19    2 weeks ago

Again, where is crypto currency against the law?

And again, why does Brady get a pass?

The grime is on people so blinded by partisanship they make up conspiracy theories...

Do you actually think this was a plan all along? Set up a company, get investors, donate to a political party then lose it all.

Sounds like a lot of work when they can all just go to anyone and ask for money...

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
3.1.21  seeder  Sean Treacy  replied to  Ender @3.1.20    2 weeks ago
here is crypto currency against the law?

Who said it was?  

d again, why does Brady get a pass?

Is Tom Brady in Congress?  

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
3.1.22  Ender  replied to  Sean Treacy @3.1.21    2 weeks ago

I hit post too soon and added more to that comment.

Anyway, if it is not against the law, how is it fraud?

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
3.1.23  Ender  replied to  Sean Treacy @3.1.21    2 weeks ago

Brady is a part of this company that you all are calling fraud.

So if the company was a fraud, so was Brady for being a part of it.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
3.1.24  seeder  Sean Treacy  replied to  Ender @3.1.22    2 weeks ago
it is not against the law, how is it fraud?

Lying about assets, dishonest  accounting, commingling funds  etc.

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
3.1.25  Ender  replied to  Sean Treacy @3.1.24    2 weeks ago

Sounds like most corporations...

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
3.1.26  seeder  Sean Treacy  replied to  Ender @3.1.23    2 weeks ago
rady is a part of this company that you all are calling fraud.

Brady is not in Congress. Larry David and Matt Damon were too. Both are huge Democrats and no one is criticizing them. 

Brady was not running the business and he's not in Congress.  Unless you have some secret knowledge about him running the company I have no idea why you think he's relevant. 

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
3.1.27  Ender  replied to  Sean Treacy @3.1.26    2 weeks ago

So what. The guy that ran the company was not in congress.

Brady was the brand ambassador for the company for God sake and you are going to act like he has no part in it.

He and Gronk were giving people in the stands crypto currency after someone gave back a football.

He was pushing it and hard.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
3.1.28  seeder  Sean Treacy  replied to  Ender @3.1.27    2 weeks ago
The guy that ran the company was not in congress/

Right. But that's who involved.  The members of Congress who took the company's money and worked on the legislation to protect the fraud and the directors of the company who decided to give it to them.

Unless they fit into one of those boxes, they really aren't relevant. 

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
3.1.29  Ender  replied to  Sean Treacy @3.1.28    2 weeks ago
worked on the legislation to protect the fraud

Link? I know of no legislation about crypto currency. Seriously, I never heard this before.

I always thought it was bogus (crypto currency), one cannot make money out of thin air. (unless the US federal reserve...)

Yet these and most 'tech' companies are real and so far, legal.

If one is going to complain about taking money from one company then complain about all of them that do it.

All I am seeing here is now talking about which companies should be able to donate...

If you think other major corporations that contribute to both sides have no sway in congress....

None of it is anything new, I only see picking and choosing.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
3.1.30  seeder  Sean Treacy  replied to  Ender @3.1.29    2 weeks ago
I know of no legislation about crypto currency. Seriously, I never heard this before

From the seed:

"He lavished his largesse on “pro-crypto Democrats” like New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, who was sponsoring a bill to lock the Securities and Exchange Commission out of regulating the crypto market."

f one is going to complain about taking money from one company then complain about all of them that do it.

Lol.  I'll complain about all companies that commit fraud, lose billions of investors money while simultaneously spending tens of millions on politicians to protect itself. 

But that's not an issue for you. I get it. 

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Masters Quiet
3.1.31  Jack_TX  replied to  Ender @3.1.11    2 weeks ago
Where is the outrage against him?

Why would there be outrage against him?

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Masters Quiet
3.1.32  Jack_TX  replied to  Ender @3.1.23    2 weeks ago
Brady is a part of this company that you all are calling fraud. So if the company was a fraud, so was Brady for being a part of it.

That's not at all how that works.

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
3.1.33  Ender  replied to  Sean Treacy @3.1.30    2 weeks ago
  In over just a couple weeks in May, cryptocurrencies lost more than half a trillion dollars in market value. That had both the crypto industry and crypto skeptics calling more loudly for some regulation of the market.

And this week Senators Kirsten Gillibrand, Democrat of New York, and Cynthia Lummis, Republican of Wyoming, presented the first comprehensive crypto regulatory bill. The day it came out, we spoke with them about why they put together this legislation. Here's Cynthia Lummis first.

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
3.1.34  Ender  replied to  Jack_TX @3.1.32    2 weeks ago

So he is not part of the company?

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Masters Quiet
3.1.35  Jack_TX  replied to  Ender @3.1.34    2 weeks ago
So he is not part of the company?

Of course not.  He's a spokesperson, kinda like Lily from the ATT commercials.  If there is a service outage in your area, are you holding her responsible?   Is she "part of the company"?  No, she's a paid actor.  Brady is the same.

They paid Brady in stock rather than US dollars, which means he's a shareholder, much the way I'm a shareholder of IBM or JP Morgan.  I own part of those companies. I'm not involved in their operations.  If Chase loses your money, I had nothing to do with it.  If they do daft shit that causes the stock to lose value, I lose money, just like Brady lost money on FTX.

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
3.1.36  Ender  replied to  Jack_TX @3.1.35    2 weeks ago
So Brady and his now ex-wife, Gisele Bündchen, signed a deal with the cryptocurrency exchange FTX that month.

It was an equity deal that made Brady the brand ambassador of the company. The deal also gave Bündchen an environmental and social initiatives adviser role in the company. And the couple attached a lot of their $600 million net worth into the investment.

Fast forward to 2022, the exchange has dropped 72% in value. The cryptocurrency market is in shambles. And crypto giant Binance is set to buy out the company in pennies over a dollar. That may see both Brady and Bündchen lose a major chunk of their net worth. Just another bad day for the NFL G.O.A.T.

He is a lot more than someone investing in their 401k.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Masters Quiet
3.1.37  Jack_TX  replied to  Ender @3.1.36    2 weeks ago

You're posting things that directly contradict each other, and I'm not sure you realize you're doing it.

We have no credible confirmation that he lost a "significant part of his net worth", and if he did, why would you expect people to be "outraged" at Brady if he was defrauded and lost a fortune?

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
3.1.38  Ender  replied to  Jack_TX @3.1.37    2 weeks ago

Uh huh....

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.39  Vic Eldred  replied to  Sean Treacy @3.1.3    2 weeks ago
Does it feel good to defend your party  taking millions from someone who defrauded Americans of billions? 

This actually was the story of the day. The second biggest democratic party donor just blew up investors money, the day after securing the US Senate for democrats. FTX just went bankrupt after $32 Billion went unaccounted for. FTX came on the scene in 2020 after donating about $10 Million to Joe Biden's campaign. Sam Bankman-Fried was second only to George Soros as a democrat donor. I can still recall a political pundit asking: "Where is all this democrat money coming from?"

For our "critical thinker" friends: we now know the answer!  (and it's not a conspiracy theory)

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
4  Vic Eldred    2 weeks ago

There was a time when the breaking of this story would have earned a Pulitzer Prize.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
4.1  seeder  Sean Treacy  replied to  Vic Eldred @4    2 weeks ago

time when the breaking of this story would have earned a Pulitzer Prize.

Yeah, the obsession with Enron and it's ties to Republicans  (they donated 5 million to Republicans over a decade) vs the silence surrounding this fraud who was wholeheartedly embraced by progressives from their  media,  to Congress while giving them tens of millions is telling. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
4.1.1  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @4.1    2 weeks ago

Its almost as bad as the richest man in the world posting conspiracy theories on your behalf and telling his social media followers in the millions to vote Republican. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
4.1.2  Vic Eldred  replied to  Sean Treacy @4.1    2 weeks ago

There are two standards. You know that!

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
4.1.3  seeder  Sean Treacy  replied to  JohnRussell @4.1.1    2 weeks ago
s bad as the richest man in the world posting conspiracy theories on your behalf and telling his social media followers in the millions to vote Republica

Bezos tells people to vote Democratic. 

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
5  Ronin2    2 weeks ago

Want to take bets he and his mother have never been audited by the IRS (Into Republicans Solely)?

Funded the Democrats with 60 million (if not more). Then declared bankruptcy on the tax payer dime shafting his customers and investors.

But there is nothing to see here. Keep moving along everyone.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
5.1  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ronin2 @5    2 weeks ago

It's the new class of "critical thinkers."  Nobody is allowed to ask questions.

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
6  JBB    2 weeks ago

Don't like it? Get rid of Citizens United. Easy Peasy!

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
6.1  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  JBB @6    2 weeks ago
Get rid of Citizens United. Easy Peasy!

How do you easily get rid of a SCOTUS ruling?

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
6.1.1  Ender  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @6.1    2 weeks ago

New scotus....seems precedent is no longer a thing.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
6.1.2  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Ender @6.1.1    2 weeks ago

I don’t know how much of a thing it ever was. There have always been justifications for bucking finding a way around precedent a majority of justices  think the previous decision mistaken. 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
6.1.3  seeder  Sean Treacy  replied to  Ender @6.1.1    2 weeks ago
seems precedent is no longer a thing.

When was the last supreme Court justice appointed who never voted to overturn a precedent? 

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
6.1.4  Ender  replied to  Sean Treacy @6.1.3    2 weeks ago

So basically there are no true laws if they can be overturned...

Are you for or against citizens united?

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
6.1.5  seeder  Sean Treacy  replied to  Ender @6.1.4    2 weeks ago
So basically there are no true laws if they can be overturned..

A law can always be overturned.  Congress can't bind future Congresses. 

Are you for or against citizens united?

Congress can't restrict political speech.  A law, like Citizens United, that outlaws books is not Constitutional 

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
6.1.6  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Ender @6.1.4    2 weeks ago

Are you for or against citizens united?

I think that banning the Clinton movie was an infringement on free speech.  
I'm also for more transparency on where/who the funds come from, and more restrictions on foreign money.

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
6.1.7  Ender  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @6.1.6    2 weeks ago

Banning a Clinton movie? Never heard that one.

I just think it is ironic that people complaining about corporations giving money are usually the same people that have no problem with a corporation backing a certain candidate.

If it is bad for one it should be bad for all, yet that is not what I am hearing.

I think these pacs and super pacs have been nothing but detrimental to our political landscape.

Imo it is basically just a way to get around campaign finance laws.

 
 
 
evilgenius
Professor Guide
6.1.8  evilgenius  replied to  Ender @6.1.7    2 weeks ago
Banning a Clinton movie? Never heard that one.

A conservative non-profit group, Citizens United , produced a movie Hillary: The Movie to run before the 2008 Presidential election. It was available on DVD and in theaters. The group tried to run it on cable as OnDemand.

Citizens United:

David Bossie has been its president since 2000. In 2016 he took a leave of absence to be deputy campaign manager of  Donald Trump 's campaign for President of the United States.
 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
6.1.9  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Ender @6.1.7    2 weeks ago
Banning a Clinton movie? Never heard that one.

Citizens United, a conservative non-profit, challenged a FEC ruling that stopped it from airing a film critical of then presidential candidate Hillary before the 2008 primaries.

I just think it is ironic that people complaining about corporations giving money are usually the same people that have no problem with a corporation backing a certain candidate.

That does sound ironic.

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
6.1.10  Ender  replied to  evilgenius @6.1.8    2 weeks ago

I am dumb. I didn't even remember that was about a stupid movie.

Still I feel kinda right about some things I said. It basically said that they should use pacs to get around finance law.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
6.1.11  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Ender @6.1.10    2 weeks ago
I am dumb. I didn't even remember that was about a stupid movie.

No one remembers everything accurately.  When politicians and the media discuss the impact of the decision, they focus on corporations and money and rarely remind people of what the actual cases that SCOTUS heard was about.  There are certainly campaign finance restrictions that could be legislated that don't violate the first amendment.  SCOTUS is less the problem here, a dysfunctional Congress is.

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
6.1.12  Ender  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @6.1.11    2 weeks ago

From reading a little of what EG posted, my simplification.  Haha

The lower courts said that the movie would have to show donors and how it was financed and could not play 30 days before the election. The scotus basically said they could use a political action committee and not have to worry about it...

 
 
 
pat wilson
Professor Guide
7  pat wilson    2 weeks ago
The analysis found Republicans have outspent Democrats when it comes to federal candidates and political committees this midterm election cycle.  Republican spending amounted to $4.6 billion, compared to Democrats’ $3.9 billion. 

Ya keep crying about a 40 million donation to the Dems.

And the Get Out The Vote is a grift and a ballot harvesting campaign, give me a break !

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
7.1  Ender  replied to  pat wilson @7    2 weeks ago

I guess more people voting is a bad thing in some eyes.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
7.2  seeder  Sean Treacy  replied to  pat wilson @7    2 weeks ago
keep crying about a 40 million donation to the Dems.

Lol .It's always amazing to see what partisans will ignore when it help their cause.

Thanks.

 
 
 
pat wilson
Professor Guide
7.2.1  pat wilson  replied to  Sean Treacy @7.2    2 weeks ago

When you start to condemn all the millions the republicans received then you'll have a point to make.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
7.2.2  seeder  Sean Treacy  replied to  pat wilson @7.2.1    2 weeks ago
ndemn all the millions the republicans received then you'll have a point to make.

I have no problem condemning any Republican who took millions from criminal companies that were going bankrupt.  Do you have a list?

I look forward to you defending Republicans taking money from criminals. 

 
 
 
pat wilson
Professor Guide
7.2.3  pat wilson  replied to  Sean Treacy @7.2.2    2 weeks ago
I look forward to you defending Republicans taking money from criminals. 

Huh ?

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
8  Buzz of the Orient    2 weeks ago

I haven't a clue what cryptocurrency/bitcoin is and I don't give a damn.  I don't use my phone to pay at a cashier and I have no idea how to use those fancy square images that are supposed to mean something.   I don't even have a credit card.  My father used to say "If you don't have the cash in your pocket to pay for it, you can't afford it."  I think he was absolutely right.  And if people are going to lose their money because of IMF and the others, isn't that just too bad - I don't feel at all sorry for them.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
8.1  JohnRussell  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @8    2 weeks ago

I think you are on the right track, although without credit cards the world economy would crash. Credit makes the world go round. 

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
8.1.1  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  JohnRussell @8.1    2 weeks ago

Of course I do have a bank debit card, but it is used to draw out money that I already have in my account..

 
 

Who is online

Vic Eldred
evilgenius
Ronin2
Tessylo
Kavika


22 visitors