The Support Campaign for SBF Continues
On March 28, the court is set to deliver its final sentence for SBF. The public is keenly waiting to see whether the life sentence for the former billionaire will be upheld or if his defense team can persuade the jury to reduce his sentence to 78 months in custody.
In anticipation of the final court session, the global crypto community has already heard from a former fellow cellmate of Bankman-Fried, who claimed that the former crypto king's psychological state is severely poor, casting doubt on his ability to survive in prison.The campaign has now escalated with the release of a book by the famous author and journalist Michael Lewis, focusing on SBF's personality traits.
Michael Lewis has earned acclaim in the USA for his insightful looks into controversial politicians, celebrities, and prominent entrepreneurs. Having met with Sam Bankman-Fried numerous times over two years, he penned "Going Infinite," a book detailing the rise and fall of the crypto king and his FTX empire. In it, the Brooklyn jail detainee is depicted as a complex yet ultimately positive figure.
Following the FTX collapse, representatives from both parties claimed to have returned all received funds, casting a shadow of mistrust over the Republicans. Since the donations were secret, how can one prove that no one pocketed a portion of the funds?The U.S. Attorney for the FTX case, Damian Williams, explicitly stated in a press conference: "All of this dirty money was used in service of Bankman-Fried's desire to buy bipartisan influence and impact the direction of public policy in Washington."
In this context, the best tactic is to appeal to the jury's emotions, which Michael Lewis is successfully doing. He admits to seeing his book as a "letter to the jury."
It's hard to tell whether Lewis reached this conclusion based on Sam's stories or through empirical projection. But if true, SBF undoubtedly needs professional psychiatric help. Will his lawyers pursue this angle? We'll watch as the events unfold.
Lewis suggests that it wasn't Sam who sought out celebrities for endorsements; rather, they approached him, seeking funds and thereby accelerating the downfall of FTX and Alameda Research. SBF's philanthropic aspirations, stoked by celebrity endorsements, couldn't keep pace with his capabilities, leading to a dismal outcome. If not for the swarm of sycophants surrounding him, Sam could have ascended to trillionaire status, and his exchange could have rivaled Apple in market capitalization.
Lewis leaves it to the reader to determine whether Sam Bankman-Fried is a master scammer or a genius in crumpled shorts, ill-equipped for managing a major business enterprise. Yet, after reading the book, one is relieved not to be a juror in a New York courtroom. The writer so adeptly manipulates the facts that one can't help but feel a tinge of sympathy for the unfortunate SBF.The full interview is available for viewing here.
Michael Lewis has earned acclaim in the USA for his insightful looks into controversial politicians, celebrities, and prominent entrepreneurs. Having met with Sam Bankman-Fried numerous times over two years, he penned "Going Infinite," a book detailing the rise and fall of the crypto king and his FTX empire. In it, the Brooklyn jail detainee is depicted as a complex yet ultimately positive figure.
Michael Lewis and SBF. Source: YouTube
In a "60 Minutes" feature broadcast during prime time on CBS News, Lewis presented an interview where he discussed the undue harshness faced by the former FTX CEO. We've compiled the key arguments from the writer that aim to shift public perception in favor of SBF and potentially influence the jury toward a more lenient sentence.
Why SBF's Case Became Political
The defendant's lawyers have realized that appealing to the judge's and prosecutors' sympathies is futile. The FTX case has evolved from a purely criminal matter (fraud) into a political issue (bribery). SBF, despite making contributions to congress members from both parties, favored the Democrats with the larger portion of his donations, sparking outrage among Republicans.
SBF lacks discretion, and despite his lawyer, Mark S. Cohen, insisting on a "silence policy," silencing his client's eloquence proved impossible. During his interviews, Bankman-Fried mentioned two things:
- All contributions to the Republican Party were made in secret. "[R]eporters freak the f**k out if you donate to a Republican because they’re all super liberal. And I didn’t want to have that fight, so I just made all the Republican ones dark."
- He is one of the largest donors to the Democratic Party.
Following the FTX collapse, representatives from both parties claimed to have returned all received funds, casting a shadow of mistrust over the Republicans. Since the donations were secret, how can one prove that no one pocketed a portion of the funds?The U.S. Attorney for the FTX case, Damian Williams, explicitly stated in a press conference: "All of this dirty money was used in service of Bankman-Fried's desire to buy bipartisan influence and impact the direction of public policy in Washington."
Now, if the sentence is mitigated, a Republican judge risks accusations of bowing to the will of party colleagues who benefited from the donations and didn't admit it.
In this context, the best tactic is to appeal to the jury's emotions, which Michael Lewis is successfully doing. He admits to seeing his book as a "letter to the jury."
What principles does the writer promote?
SBF is a gamer and philanthropist, not a thief
Lewis argues that a young man with $22 billion intended to spend it to save humanity from extinction. Moreover, he describes him as the most unusual and complex character he has ever interacted with.
Sam's life story is all about people misunderstanding him... He aimed to earn as much money as possible in order to give it away as effectively as possible. Effective altruism for Sam doesn't mean you should become a doctor in Africa, but rather that you should pay people to become doctors in Africa. One doctor can save, for example, 40 lives. How many lives can 40 doctors, whose education was paid for by someone like Sam, save? You do the math.
Lewis insists that Sam's market activity is simply a strategic game. He gamified everything within reach. Instead of trading himself, he created a complex economic game – FTX, in which millions could participate. He used his experience from the stock market and transferred it to a crypto company, allowing traders to trade cryptocurrencies as the smartest Wall Street speculators did.
While the court accuses SBF of stealing client funds, Lewis concludes that Bankman-Fried didn't steal but... borrowed. The publicist spent hundreds of hours with Sam, discussing life, and believes that the fallen crypto king didn't realize where his fantasies ended and legal boundaries began. He thought he was among like-minded people who hated banks and governments but trusted each other. Therefore, he didn't expect his actions to be seen as theft.
It's hard to tell whether Lewis reached this conclusion based on Sam's stories or through empirical projection. But if true, SBF undoubtedly needs professional psychiatric help. Will his lawyers pursue this angle? We'll watch as the events unfold.
SBF Could Have Been a Trillionaire
Lewis depicts FTX as a large-scale online casino, with SBF playing the role of its proprietor.
He started out in this casino as a player, but then he realized that he could build the best casino in the world. When his exchange was trading $15 billion, and he was sitting in the center of these transactions and taking a tiny piece of each one, he became indifferent to the outcome of the trade. He didn't care if the cryptocurrency went up or down. He wasn't risking anything. As long as people are trading cryptocurrency, it's the best business. He started collecting billions as easily as if they were Pokémon cards.
Even though he continued to show little concern for his appearance, his social capital soared as swiftly as his bank balance. Beautiful women found him irresistible. This shabbily dressed billionaire became a magnet for top stylists, athletes, and celebrities because he could bankroll competitions and concerts. SBF turned into a prize catch for many influencers, both famous and otherwise: he was willing to hand out money with no strings attached and without demanding accountability for its expenditure. He became a source of easy money, with everyone dubbing him their best friend. The only expectation in return was to endorse FTX and proclaim it the best crypto exchange in the world from every platform.
These partnerships between the "geek" (as Lewis refers to SBF) and quarterbacks (a nod to American football stars like Tom Brady and Trevor Lawrence who had deals with the FTX exchange) transformed Sam into the unrestrained figure witnessed before the exchange's downfall. The FTX CEO lavished millions indiscriminately, trapped by the court of public opinion and unable to turn anyone down.Michael Lewis in his book lists dozens of high-profile individuals Bankman-Fried financed. According to the author, they not only unlawfully promoted the FTX exchange and cryptocurrencies but also diverted SBF from his true path.
Lewis suggests that it wasn't Sam who sought out celebrities for endorsements; rather, they approached him, seeking funds and thereby accelerating the downfall of FTX and Alameda Research. SBF's philanthropic aspirations, stoked by celebrity endorsements, couldn't keep pace with his capabilities, leading to a dismal outcome. If not for the swarm of sycophants surrounding him, Sam could have ascended to trillionaire status, and his exchange could have rivaled Apple in market capitalization.
What more does Michael Lewis aim to reveal to the jury?
In his interview and book, Michael Lewis uncovers several intriguing details intended to sway the court:
- SBF views Donald Trump as a menace to democracy's foundations and an existential threat to both the USA and the globe. He even contemplated offering Trump $5 billion to abstain from the 2024 presidential race.
- Sam was the largest contributor to Joe Biden's campaign.
- Elon Musk had invited him to partake in the Twitter acquisition, which Sam declined, criticizing Musk's vision of corporate governance as undemocratic.
- Sam was arguably the least effective manager imaginable. He could not manage people and oversee processes. Resembling a naive child, he placed his trust in everyone and was in dire need of guidance himself. Meanwhile, his own parents exploited every opportunity to siphon money from him.
- The company essentially lacked a Chief Financial Officer, a Human Resources department, and an accounting team. All processes were neglected, but Sam believed that was appropriate, arguing that team relations should be founded on unconditional trust.
- He didn't possess the natural temperament of a leader. His sole leadership experience was solving advanced mathematical puzzles during his high school years. Consequently, his decisions were predominantly made by his partner, Caroline Ellison.
Lewis leaves it to the reader to determine whether Sam Bankman-Fried is a master scammer or a genius in crumpled shorts, ill-equipped for managing a major business enterprise. Yet, after reading the book, one is relieved not to be a juror in a New York courtroom. The writer so adeptly manipulates the facts that one can't help but feel a tinge of sympathy for the unfortunate SBF.The full interview is available for viewing here.
