Bankman-Fried and FTX Execs Received $4.1B in Personal Loans from Alameda
forbes.com
forbes.com
https://www.ft.com/content/993942cb-1a7e-4689-9d9d-8434d4a74...
It is possible to fight extradition under a few theories, but I don't see how they apply here.
Also another thing to consider is wether he will stay in the Bahamas if it becomes a problem.
In my opinion, I do want to say that given the more provocative elements of the story, I get a sense that it seems to point to a larger-than-life lifestyle involving people working together and engaging in activities that mixed drugs, sex, and huge amounts of money - not to mention the "conspiratorial" elite connections to political figures and academics that are connected via SBF and Caroline Ellis. Given that so many people were impacted by what are crimes, as can be seen by how ferociously the twitter sphere is picking at all parts of the story - it appears that everything is under judgement, frankly.
Making Twitter angry is illegal now?
"Rich 20-somethings like drugs and sex on tropical beaches" is a pretty uninteresting story to me. "Rich 20-somethings do so much adderall that they code backdoors instead of having sex whith tropical beaches are outside" is at least more interesting to read about.
A minor detail in the scheme of decabillions of, at best, mismanagement.
Not at all a coincidence. It is where he lived and where his company was based.
No coincidence at all he was in the Bahamas when it all blew up!
https://thenassauguardian.com/mitchell-on-bankman-fried-extr...
A politician wants to maximize future donations. SBF won't donate in the future, and other donors won't stick up for him.
So why should politicians continue to deliver? A deep sense of fairness?
If the politicians protect SBF to any extent, they signal to potential donors how useful a donation can be. Some of the rich will start donating or increasing their donations to get the same "get-out-of-jail-or-have-sentence-reduced" card.
Someone is going to be the sacrificial lamb, and there are few targets as juicy.
Madoff failed this. And if even fraction of what SBF has done is true. Yep, he is also going away. As this has entered outright territory of fraud.
You're buying influence over laws and regulations that directly impact your ability to make money, which has much greater value to most donors.
And I don't necessarily agree the incentives don't hold up. Why would SBF have gotten the idea to donate millions of (his customers' and investors') dollars to political campaigns? Every top political donor does so for lobbying power and to win favor with politicians as the primary factor.
So far, Do Kwon, Mashinsky, Three Arrows Capital, and all those other scammers are not in jail. Not a single one.
> Then (Martin) Shkreli addressed Kwon directly, “Hey Do, I just wanted to let you know jail’s not that bad. It’s not the worst thing, you know. So don’t fret if that... I hope it doesn’t happen, but if it does happen it’s not that bad.”
https://gizmodo.com/pharma-bro-crypto-do-kwon-terra-luna-184...
He needs a street smart criminal lawyer that would tell him to shut up.
Maury Levy or Saul Goodman would be best.
The level of corruption is too high in US finance and politics for that to happen.
Some are here for the technology. May it all burn to the ground.