3 ms·

Yeah but that was a very shitty prediction. It appears the charges filed were by SDNY which if anything is known for being anti-Trump. Essentially a bunch of de

• function_seven 4y ago
  Not only shitty, but opposite of how you'd expect. When a high-profile donor does a high-profile crime—and when they're certainly not going to be a fundraiser in the future—the recipient of those donations has a lot of motivation to distance themselves from the fraudster, to be harsher in their actions, to respond to pressure and sever any perceived ties.
  • deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  • giantrobot 4y ago
    This is a cogent point. Sometimes people see political donations as a suicide pact and they most definitely are not. A politician's deference to a donor is a function of the probability of future donations from them. If that probably drops to zero their deference drops to zero. A donor is only as good as their next donation. This is true on all sides of the aisle. If SBF hadn't tried to speed run every crypto-scam he might have some political connections left. But he's not just persona non-grata, he's broke. He doesn't have much to offer politicians at this point except testifying against co-conspirators (should there be any).
• MisterMower 4y ago
  Not surprising, I’m sure they want to run the investigation to ensure they can run damage control and keep the most implicating evidence out of the public eye.
  • fasthands9 4y ago
    Is there any evidence that would convince you that you are wrong? Was your prediction last week that this would happen - or did you predict he wouldnt be charged? I personally do not think the Dems care about a broke crypto dude who can contribute nothing to them and didnt exist 3 years ago.