That is a great interview. But it turns out Coffeezilla got tricked here by letting SBF turn back to the fiat funds. SBF did not admit to fraud. The TOS spec

That is a great interview. But it turns out Coffeezilla got tricked here by letting SBF turn back to the fiat funds. SBF did not admit to fraud. The TOS specifically defines 'e-money' separately from digital assets. As soon as customers liquidated their digital assets to withdraw real money, they were no longer protected by the digital asset part of the TOS. The comingling of fiat / e-money is not disallowed by the TOS. Only comingling of digital assets was prohibited. Coffeezilla was so close to pinning SBF here but by letting him wiggle out by dropping the digital assets and focus on comingling of e-money during withdrawals (which was not protected) SBF escape again. That is by liquidating the digital assets by the TOS, FTX was then allowed to commingle their e-money and the 'fungible' withdrawal process was not against TOS. Coffezilla should have pinned down SBF about digital asset withdrawals instead of fiat withdrawals. If he had forced SBF to admit BTC, ETH, etc withdrawals were comingled then he would have had a fraud admission, and actually Coffee started out with that before SBF quite quite genuise-ly redirected to fiat withdrawals. I think this was a carefully crafted redirection by SBF to trick Coffee into thinking he got his 'gotcha' while SBF again escaped.