2 ms·

You're forgetting how "He donated to democrats so he'll get off scott free"

function_seven 3y ago
Yeah, stupidest hot-take I ever saw in this case. No politician will stick their neck out for someone based on past donations if: 1. There is little hope for future money 2. The donor is universally reviled If anything, that donation history made the recipients even more likely to turn on him. They must distance themselves.
- Ekaros 3y ago
  There is time when you cut your useful idiots loose. And when they have run out of money, or you can make example of them makes perfect sense.
- sky_rw 3y ago
  The opinion that I believe s most close to the truth re: favors for donations, is that politicians value constancy and dependability more than short term cash injections. One needs to be playing the game for decades before you can start earning 'get out of jail' type favors.
randallsquared 3y ago
People who were arguing that then probably now would argue that the politicians found a workaround: just having him not charged for bribery and campaign finance crimes. No need to investigate the recipients if the alleged crime is ignored! https://www.cnbc.com/2023/07/27/prosecutors-drop-another-charge-against-ftxs-sam-bankman-fried.html https://www.cnbc.com/2023/07/27/prosecutors-drop-another-cha...
- matthewdgreen 3y ago
  Keeping up to date with the news can be challenging I guess. https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2023/08/08/sam-bankman-fried-will-still-face-campaign-finance-related-charge-doj-says/?outputType=amp https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2023/08/08/sam-bankman-fried...
  - nullc 3y ago
    Isn't that limited to the small portion of funding that was via straw payments, as the extradition terms allows money laundering charges?
    - matthewdgreen 3y ago
      Both articles seem to be in agreement that the campaign finance charges are being dropped because of the extradition treaty with the Bahamas. The second article indicates that the government intends to work around that limitation by charging it as wire fraud. From my perspective that kind of workaround seems like overzealous prosecution, not deliberate under-prosecution as the GP poster implies. But what do I know.

Yeah, stupidest hot-take I ever saw in this case. No politician will stick their neck out for someone based on past donations if: 1. There is little hope for future money 2. The donor is universally reviled If anything, that donation history made the recipients even more likely to turn on him. They must distance themselves.

Ekaros 3y ago
There is time when you cut your useful idiots loose. And when they have run out of money, or you can make example of them makes perfect sense.
sky_rw 3y ago
The opinion that I believe s most close to the truth re: favors for donations, is that politicians value constancy and dependability more than short term cash injections. One needs to be playing the game for decades before you can start earning 'get out of jail' type favors.

randallsquared 3y ago

People who were arguing that then probably now would argue that the politicians found a workaround: just having him not charged for bribery and campaign finance crimes. No need to investigate the recipients if the alleged crime is ignored! https://www.cnbc.com/2023/07/27/prosecutors-drop-another-charge-against-ftxs-sam-bankman-fried.html https://www.cnbc.com/2023/07/27/prosecutors-drop-another-cha...

matthewdgreen 3y ago
Keeping up to date with the news can be challenging I guess. https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2023/08/08/sam-bankman-fried-will-still-face-campaign-finance-related-charge-doj-says/?outputType=amp https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2023/08/08/sam-bankman-fried...
- nullc 3y ago
  Isn't that limited to the small portion of funding that was via straw payments, as the extradition terms allows money laundering charges?
  - matthewdgreen 3y ago
    Both articles seem to be in agreement that the campaign finance charges are being dropped because of the extradition treaty with the Bahamas. The second article indicates that the government intends to work around that limitation by charging it as wire fraud. From my perspective that kind of workaround seems like overzealous prosecution, not deliberate under-prosecution as the GP poster implies. But what do I know.