Did Sam Bankman-Fried's Defense Blow It? (feat. David Z. Morris) - Episode 133
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 17 มิ.ย. 2024
- Cas Piancey and @bennettftomlin are joined by David Z. Morris to discuss the trial of Sam Bankman-Fried, and the testimony against him so far. This includes longtime friend Adam Yedidia, FTX leader Gary Wang, and investor Matt Huang.
This video was recorded on October 8th, 2023.
Read more: cryptocriticscorner.com/2023/...
Additional episodes mentioned in this episode:
TH-cam playlist of videos about FTX, Alameda Research, and Sam Bankman-Fried
• FTX, Alameda Research,...
Episode 118 - How to spot a scam
• How to spot a scam - E...
Episode 15 - Revisiting Enron with David Z. Morris
• Revisiting Enron with ...
Episode 27 - Evergrande with David Z. Morris
• Evergrande with David ...
Episode 124 - Effective Altruism: Buy an island nation and feel moral
• Effective Altruism: Mo...
Episode 127 - Let’s talk about Number Go Up with Zeke Faux
• Let's talk about Numbe...
Episode 130 - Sam Bankman-Fried’s parents were in on it
• Were SBF's parents in ...
Episode 42 - Elizabeth Holmes, Theranos, and the Future of VC (Feat. Elizabeth Lopatto)
• Elizabeth Holmes, Ther...
Additional resources:
Protos coverage of the trial
protos.com/sbftrial/
Bennett newsletter about opening statements
us2.campaign-archive.com/?u=16...
Semafor reporting on loans
www.semafor.com/article/12/07...
Tara Mac Aulay tweet about leaving
Tara_MacAulay/sta...
WSJ reporting on XRP bet
www.wsj.com/amp/articles/alam...
Reporting on MobileCoin losses
protos.com/mobilecoin-the-pro...
WSJ reporting on Cohen & Everdell
www.wsj.com/articles/sam-bank...
Liz Lopatto's coverage suggesting they may be preparing for appeal
www.theverge.com/2023/10/4/23...
Where to find David:
Flesh/Markets
davidzmorris.substack.com/
Protos
protos.com/author/dmorris/
Unchained
unchainedcrypto.com/author/da...
Twitter
/ davidzmorris
Other places to find Crypto Critics' Corner
Website: cryptocriticscorner.com/
Discord: / discord
Bluesky: bsky.app/profile/cryptocritic...
Mastodon: mstdn.social/@CryptoCriticPod
Twitter: / cryptocriticpod
Instagram: / cryptocriticpod
TikTok: vm.tiktok.com/TTPdPN2hK9/
Bennett's TH-cam: @bennettftomlin
Bennett's D&D TH-cam: @BTDND
Bennett's BlueSky: bsky.app/profile/bft.wtf
Cas' BlueSky: bsky.app/profile/caspiancey.b...
Bennett's Mastodon: mstdn.social/@bennetttomlin
Bennett's Twitter: / bennetttomlin
Cas' Twitter: / caspiancey
Bennett's Newsletter: TheFUDLetter.com/
Cas' Blog: / thecaspiancey
Bennett's Blog: bennettftomlin.com/
Timestamps:
#crypto #cryptocurrency #podcasts #listenable #sbf #ftx #alamedaresearch #sambankmanfried
![[TH] VCT Pacific Stage 2 - Week 1 Day 2 // GEN vs T1 | PRX vs TLN](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/ZkFjjJNwzH0/mqdefault.jpg)
Who needs an accountant at their billion dollar corporate fraud factory when they have QuickBooks?
Accountants have proven to be scammers best friends.
L
The skylar white strategy
Sam blew it himself when he A: "allegedly" committed fraud B: Told his own legal team to "!$£" off" according to Tiffany Fong.
Anyway now looking forward to watching ;)
To have Michael Lewis out schilling for SBF has been crushing to me. I WAS a huge Lewis fan/follower. I've read all has books starting with Liar's Poker. And to see him out actively trying to bend the truth on behalf of SBF has left me so disheartened I can't even put it into words. But I will say thank you to Cas, Bennett, and David. I appreciate what you are doing.
Why are you disheartened? Lewis just outed himself as a hypocrite. There are few to no "heroes", grow up.
@@pretorious700 You're being unnecessarily hostile + misanthropic. Lewis broke the trust of his readers + supporters. You can't wish that away with semantics + aggression + re-framing.
Humans look towards other humans for role models to aspire to learn from --- esp people who we believe to align with our values --- & is deeply normal behaviour, just part of taking in our social environment + cues around us. Anyone who trusted ML's process as a type of documentarian + enjoyed his work might be shook up to find out he's so wrong-headed, flippant, & spiteful. That's just more red flags after the flurry of the lies/omissions/scandals themselves. It probably disheartened people who believed that it was possible to do ethical journalism about unethical things that usually intimidate or bore lay-readers --- like dark financial markets --- & still be a popular writer, bordering on modern public intellectual status. Maybe young writers saw his success as a path forward? It's sad to see who Michael Lewis really is via what he's ready to compromise. Whatever the OC is feeling is fine + valid + they don't need your sophomoric philosophical frame-job or dismissive minimizing that misrepresents their original expression.
Why are you even at a channel that examines nuances of financial behaviour/manipulation in individuals + institutions + various groups/milieus while dismissing commonplace human socialengagement? Your Dunbar # a fraction or something?
TL; DR --- aggro comment OC doesn't deserve. You're the one who should ask yourself why you felt the need to post your hostile response. it's not phrased in a way to invite conversation.
In hindsight I think there's been a fair amount of white washing in a lot of Michael Lewis's previous finance coverage. Why were the credit default swap people the heroes of the financial crash again?
@@picahudsoniaunflocked5426 lots of big words signifying nothing.
@@picahudsoniaunflocked5426 haha, do you do this for every angry comment on the internet? Just afraid you just got here and...😂😅
Good job! 🎉🎉
I know Cas + Bennett are above this but I'm dying for someone to be taking us thru all the courtroom sketches so I can feel laughter again.
The defense has nothing, so the usual "strategy" in that case is to obfuscate and make ridiculous false equivocations.
The "He didn't buy a yacht, did he?" defence is particularly egregious because he literally DID BUY A YACHT for Sam Trabucco!!!
He also had made several billion of his own money to do with as he wished.
Sam funded that yacht purchase with a loan from Alameda, Alameda did not have money to be lending out, therefore Sam did not make several billion of his own money
@@CryptoCriticPod A loan from Alameda though Alameda was hemorrhaging money. Would it be safe to say the ultimate source of the money was FTX customer funds? LOL.
@gordons-alive4940 yes
@@NickKautzare you related to Sammy the thief
His best defense should have been "I'm an imbecile, I did all of this as I didn't want to upset my mum".
I've never heard of "influence back-peddling" but his lawyers sure tried that.
It seems like the defense may not think bringing up the donations either to politics or charity works for them. On the one hand it would open up texts with gabriel bankman fried and their mom and expose them to having to testify and on the political side the straw donations. Unfortunately for them there's no other narrarive about how all the money spent went to good causes.
They are saving the Chewbacca defence for the last day.
I had to wait 38 minutes while you guys discuss some strange irrelevant trial to finally hear that CasCoin is indeed SAFU. Thanks for confirming though! 🚀🚀🚀
no yacht your honor, just a penthouse in bahamas. what a regular joe!
I’m an *old* lawyer/ litigator and I admire your coverage. I’m learning a lot. 🙏🏼
Proof?
The trial and nonsensical defense is one thing, but this even more has changed my opinion of Michael Lewis as well. Even if you give him a pass for the jury tampering (which you shouldn't), talk about an unreliable narrator. He might as well be in the category of historical fiction. I wouldn't trust his assessment of good guys and bad guys at all after this. I really love him defending SBF who screwed and defrauded normies while vilifying Theranos for defrauding venture capital and old rich guys who frankly should have known better and were in a position to verify things. Those greedy bastards are the reason they were put in a position to give people the wrong results and threaten patient safety. If they had done their due diligence, they wouldn't have put people's health at risk at all.
Wanted to add to this that Lewis also wrote "The Blind Side" about Michael Oher and we all have heard about that case in the news recently. Turns out he was friends with Sean Tuohy and completely did not disclose that in the book or anywhere initially.
@@lady8jane exactly
Michael Lewis plummeted in my esteem almost as fast as SBF's mystique persona evaporated in sunlight.
(I've read most of his pre 2012 work.)
I feel sad for him and his wife; their only daughter (19 yo) died in an automobile accident. Very sad and sorry for Mr Lewis and his wife
Scam Bankrupt-Fraud
Great content as always. You guys are not only my favorite financial podcast (as a historian/archaeologist I love the systematic well researched and balanced reporting, not trying to blow smoke, just a fact), but you guys are also making me want to write a book on the history of cultish behavior in the financial sector. You have many Crypto projects with associated characteristics, you have Scientology which is in many ways simply a money making scheme, but also definitely a cult. Cults are often monetarily extractive. I'm curious what the long term history of this relationship teaches us. Anyway, I digress. Thanks for the good reporting and the food for thought.
Please write that or do your own podcast series, I'd be among the throng interested!
when are the parents going to jail?
We discuss that possibility here: Were SBF's parents in on it? Follow the Money - Episode 130
th-cam.com/video/QXfBp3c7GTY/w-d-xo.html
The purpose of a deposition is to 1) preserve that witnesses' testimony now to know what that witness says today about whatever happened that you're questioning them about and 2) to preserve their testimony in the event that witness may be unavailable for trial. If the witness is present and giving testimony at the trial, the only purpose of the prior deposition testimony is to highlight any contradictory testimony by that witness.
You cannot read the entirety of that deposition into the record because the witness is there in person to give live testimony and be questioned by all parties (prosecution, defense, judge, jury). Since you have that live witness, their deposition is hearsay, or "an out of court statement offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted". If the live testifying witness never contradicts themselves by giving testimony opposite or contradictory to their previous sworn testimony, there is no practical use of the deposition as the witness' own words are the best evidence available to the judge and jury.
It's a confusing legal theory, but makes total sense when you think about it. Why should you present a jury with old, stale recorded testimony when you can give them fresh testimony directly from the horse's mouth? Unless that horse gives a different story or account from their deposition testimony, there is nothing the deposition can do to help the jury understand the testimony.
Thanks for the insight!
it's interesting/weird reading this as a legal theory after coming off binge-reading a roundup of relatively recent research on memory retention/formation/alteration from brain anatomy/chemistry/neurology perspectives. I can't speak to the conditions around doing depositions but my assumptions would be that they'd be more dependable as memories (more private setting than courtroom testimony; less obviously adversarial + stressful; closer to the timeline of original events; memories have less time to be revisited, unpacked, discussed with others etc which have been shown to alter our recollection of events, etc etc).
Won't pretend I'm smarter than Law tho. I did some court transcription editing for awhile. Took me a bit to code-switch bc language works so differently in the legal sphere (the legal concepts are almost "shorthanded" in the legal language, if that makes sense...) but it was an extremely illuminating + humbling experience.
Appreciate your elucidation here. Thank you.
"He didn't buy a yacht, did he?"
is a great merch slogan tho
The defense blew it by not forcing him to take a deal this guy is going away a long time!!!
I wonder what kind of deal would've been on offer? Genuinely curious.
Hows he get a deal? Hes the head honcho, Caroline and probably more people have flipped on him. They probably offered him 20 which is around what he will get in the end anyway
Brilliant Guest and coverage, thank you very much Cas and Bennett
Lol, this guy is seriously bad faith because he's scared. He's trying desperately keep Sam under the bus because he was one of the people driving the bus. If people weren't so easy to sell a narrative to, this guy would be in Sam's place right now.
No, that’s not true. David Z. Morris had no role with FTX or Alameda Research, and was in no way “driving the bus”
Agreed, excellent guest. Hope we get a post-trial debrief looking back. I like how he speaks of colleagues & is engaging with them in court. Speaks well of him to connect + keep broadening his perspective.
Also dang that "shoulder kitty" forced perspective from his camera setup was adorable. Bonus cat.
If he contributed to the narrative that resulted in the run on FTX, then he shares responsibility.@@CryptoCriticPod
@@NickKautzis that you Sam?
Good luck with "I just lost track of 8 billion" - amazing this guy wants to fight this.
Thank you all for the info!!!!
As a general rule: _if the yacht don't fit, you've gotta acquit._ Maybe this can all be blamed on Sam Trabucco, who _presumably_ has the 2.5 million dollar yacht moored up outside of Sihanoukville, Cambodia, by now.
Michael Lewis, blink twice if they have your family
edit: Don't know why I was compelled to write this here
The Michael Lewis aspect of this is so bizarre and insane. How can he be so brainwashed? What is happening?!?
Again the podcast world which isn't politically biased just blows away the "press experts", and their fancy degrees from elite university.
Well said
Like Stanford + Harvard. It's a miracle if they aren't doing any internal investigations after all the scam associated with them lately.
What the hell happened to Michael Lewis? Bought by SBF? I heard Lewis daughter died recently in a car crash, maybe that messed with his head?
Sam wanted to make a ton of cheese, thus told lots of cows to deposit their juice at FTX.
What came out though was a lot of sour milk.
Is Stanford having any kind of moment of reflection?
Would love a round-up of recent scandals touching that institution & looking at the inadequacy of the response from Stanford leadership. I've heard several smaller units of TAs, students, or even profs/depts have been pushing Stanford to examine why so much scandal is coming out of their institution, bc it really starts to seem like a pattern & there is value in looking if there's been root rot or even if best practices need updating.
the script writers for the movie are already watching, thanks for the best journalism ever! the fist in the eye moment will be featured in the film for sure!
It's so hard to know what is real when with these people...I'm not sure how to interpret that moment.
This is very entertaining and informative. Thank you!
Pardon me, you said Alameda was founded with a fortyish percent loan, meaning 40+%???
Yes, 43%, information about it is linked in description
That’s crazy. How’s that even possible? And people thought SBF was smart?
Cass Coin keeps growing!
You guys are great. This was a fun episode. Don't worry about droning on with some of the examples Cas, not when they're that relevant to the topic, Question: Why the hell doesn't this channel have (at least) 100,000 subscribers and a 'YT Play Button' yet??
Excellent guest, 4th time on; (still doesn't know to light up his face - or get a window covering?)
I'm good with his setup. Shoulder Kitty Action.
Who's advising SBF,3 witnesses against him. And he pleads not guilty?? WTF
He went on an "I did it" Nerd Talk Show Tour prior, too, so I'm not sure why he's supposed to be a genius.
@@picahudsoniaunflocked5426 exactly then he pleads not guilty...that's more jail time 🙄
The best Michael Lewis analogy I saw was an author who had been following around OJ Simspson for months before the murders. Then he goes ahead and publishes a book about a rags to riches story about a poor kid from the ghetto who triumphed as a great football player with a footnote about how he murdered two people.
Michael Lewis was always my hero with his exceptionally well written and clear books. I read most of them and most of those at least twice.
To think he's now defending SBF... I can't wrap my head around it. Reading Zeke Faulk I still hoped Lewis would change the tone in his book...
Bizarre.
there is a saying in catholic church. the sins of the best are the worst. now is lewis time
Based on going infinite and what's coming out about how he did his research for the Blind Side... I think Michael Lewis is a great writer but a shitty reporter.
I've read Liar's Poker, The Blind Side, The Big Short, and Moneyball. Looking back, they all focused on just a few key characters and their perspectives. I thought that was just a good writing decision at the time to cut down on bloat. But I assumed he did do well-rounded research and was good at cutting things out.
Seems more like he chooses his subjects, only talks to those subjects, then spits out his book and refuses to edit even if different facts come out. It's such a shame. I do love his style but I don't think I'll be able to go back to those books anymore
@@tarayoo55 Unfortunately the Blind Side is a good point, yes. He definitely missed out on a couple of details there and quite important details too.
@@baoboumusic I think I heard ML's Blind Side lapses + poor responses covered by SAVY (a book/small ethical business channel) about a month ago & pretty much immediately lost my former fan status. I'd read most of his stuff until a few years ago; I've moved on but I had respect for him until recently. The SBF connection is just crap icing on the crap cake. I'm disgusted by his CTE thing & good on Cas for mentioning it. His classist blinkers are surgically implanted at this point & I feel regret I wasted effort reading his words.
Aaaaaaahhhh this is the good stuff. Let's go.
Honestly, the fact that Bankman-Fried shared a stage with Tony Blair and Bill Clinton maybe should've been one of the red flags...
Wow 😮 thanks for covering this and the great writer/guest. Most of us don’t have the time but we are all curious!
I have learned so much from your coverage.
We’re glad to hear that!
Thank you for a concise, well presented summary. Good job guys!
[pedant mode]
An interesting, but thoroughly useless, fact: You are not hung on your own petard, but hoisted by your own petard. A petard [French for 'one who farts'] is a cannon past its useful life that has its barrel shortened, overloaded with powder, and wadded up to keep the powder from spilling out the muzzle. It is run up against the enemy's gate, with the intention that the explosion will blow the gate off of its hinges, if not smash it to kindling. The powder charge is set off by a lit piece of slow match (cord soaked in potassium nitrate, very slow burning) stuffed into the touch hole. As the slow match is lit before the run up to the gate, it is a matter of life and death to get the timing right. Too long a match will give the enemy time to move the petard away from the gate. Too short a match and the charge goes off while you are still pushing it towards the gate. The premature blast will 'hoist' you into the air and you are probably dead before you hit the ground. To be 'Hoisted by one's own petard' is to have your own actions backfire against you, horribly.
[/pedant mode]
Excellent episode, gentlemen. I’m so impressed by your work. Thanks for allowing someone who knows very little about crypto to gain a good understanding of the trial proceedings.
Even if the bank run argument is true, he was still, taking client funds.
when Sam Trabucco is going to show up ? where is he ?
He’s listed as a possible witness
12:00 the sequence where Bennett's losing his mind at the sheer madness of defence team tactics.
Great rundown on the week.
I just cannot fathom how social media can describe SBF is a "mathematic" genius when he can't even understand arithmetics.
This was so good I'm going through withdrawals and anxiety waiting for the next drop on the SBF saga.
Early next week we should have a follow up
SBF's parents are late sixties early seventies in age. I think it was mentioned late 70s. Not that it would have made a difference.
He doesn't have a defense, only sentence negotiators
'Black box' accounting
@@luciaconn6788 RNG accounting 😂
Michael Lewis has a story he likes - the one Sam Bankman-Fried sold to him about a nerd with a heart of gold who was going to use his big brain and his aw shucks demeanour to change the world for the better, the inordinate amount of money he was "making" along the way was just incidental and like many an experience journalist Michael Lewis is not going to let the truth get in the way of that story. He's got books to sell god dammit!
Michael Lewis was doing a T**** - telling on himself when he described Oher.
Imagine being his parents….even if they were complicit, they’re losing their son, savings and likely careers
Maybe don't commit fraud? They weren't bystanders, they were deeply involved in the company
Were they good parents?
@@janetshemaryahu5529 Maybe these aren't new revelations to them, but could it be the first (or final) time they're face to face with the full reality of the story and it's consequences, like, there IS no other "story?"
Have you ever heard parents raise kids to be street beggars so the parents can just stay home and watch TV. Same analogy applies to these.
Running the entire SBF/FTX/Alameda shit show on QuickBooks 2.0, is the equivalent of using an XboX Video stick to control the Odyssey Deep Dive shit show.
Serious question: Where is the money for SBF's defense coming from? Is it from ill-gotten gains? And if so, how is that allowed?
WHY Sam father is NOT in jail yet if he was on FTX multi million dollars payroll
I'm from the future and the answer is: yes
15:40 OK ya got me. 🤣🤣🤣🤣
Hey Bennett, could you (or someone else) please elaborate the logic near 21:20 about the exponential curve and expected value? I cannot follow. What did he do?
Thanks in advance.
He assumed the quantity of trading fees would keep going up and so it was likely that it would not gut the exchange as long as FTX kept growing
This episodes gives some context on how SBF makes that type of decision: Effective Altruism: Morally Buy An Island Nation - Episode 124
th-cam.com/video/uzxAqhAjbAM/w-d-xo.html
@@CryptoCriticPod Thank you very much for the explanation and for the added video about their... philosophy.
Oh dear god, there are so many flaws in this logic.
For starters, a large part of the trading fees are probably from Alameda (which you are paying to lose money), so you already have double counting.
Second, even exponential growth is unrelated to the gutting of the exchange. If Alameda is losing more money than you earn, and you stop giving them money, Alameda will go bust; if you keep giving them money, you are in the current situation. There are more problems, but who cares. And oh, and in e.g. a bank doing similar stuff would be highly illegal.
From my STEM background, i have to ask what lessons these "math students" in MIT or whatever took (they seem to misunderstand basic logic, set theory, numerical analysis etc. and may substitute it through "MIT-confidence"). I do not know if i should be angry or sad.
Anyway, thank you and thank you for your work. I hope you all are well.
Where did the money go?
It all sounds like FTX was just a mechanism, even if they weren’t conscious of it, for a pump and dump.
The Tether Papers (featuring David Canellis of Protos Media) (Audio Only) - Episode 34
th-cam.com/video/R75MSmiprrw/w-d-xo.html
He bought an 11m dollar pent house.
But I want know how all the experts who make a nice chunk of change to run my pension fund, got fooled? No due diligence?
What the hell did Michael Lewis say about Zeke Faux? Also, this episode is legit one of the most densely packed in terms of content and depth of knowledge. Been really enjoying all of you guys' articles on Protos. Bravo!
He said Faux’s comments on Lewis’ interview of SBF demonstrate how Faux is shadier than SBF
@@CryptoCriticPod wtf?! 😂 That is some projection there holy shit
SBF's parents are not in their late-70s. Bankman is 66 and Fried is 71, or at least that was their age during their son's trial.
You mentioned that FTX was a bucket shop. Could you do am episode where you explain what that means? Bucket shops are illegal as far as trading stocks. I have heard others call FTX a bucket shop as well.
We might eventually do that, sometimes we use it as a stand-in for “exchange with illegal or immoral practices” rather than the true definition of “not matching orders but going against the price value on the books”, though I think the acknowledgment that AR started at 50% of FTX volume means at least originally it basically fit the requirements
- Bennett
It needs to be noted that appealing is all good and well, only know that only wrongful application of the law / procedure etc can be appealed, not the facts of the case. So if they are empty-handed now, they will be just as empty-handed when there is an appeal, because they will not be able to bring up new stuff at that stage.
I watched the Stupid Bowl Ad. I agreed with Larry.
This news and any other news items suddenly relegated into who gives a crap. 😢
How do you think wars get funded?
They can hurry and convict so Joe can pardon him. That’s got to be worth the 10B
Yeah I know what happened but I’m not sure why. I mean, how was he using the money and for what motives?
Here’s one clue: The Tether Papers (featuring David Canellis of Protos Media) (Audio Only) - Episode 34
th-cam.com/video/R75MSmiprrw/w-d-xo.html
Why Sam Trabucco is not being called?
He is listed as a possible prosecution witness
@@CryptoCriticPod
Having been co-CEO I suppose he has some explaining to do ..
His defense team is just as good at their job as him running FTX.
From genius to idiots!!
Any idiot would have pled this case out you know everyone of sbf attorney was like hey yea we’re gonna pled this out they’re offering 20 years you’ll actually get out you should probably take that deal.
If you have a poker hand with no matches as to suit or number and no sequencing after the draw, there's nothing you can do when the other player calls, except lose. Did the defense blow it? You play the hand you're dealt and it's a crappy one for Sam Bank Fraud's attorneys.
Unrelated to the story, but the dude in the brown plaid shirt sounds a bit like Josh Gad (AKA Olaf the snowman) and so I can't get the image of a Disney character discussing crypto fraud out of my head! 😂😂
sam tabasco lmao
His defense can't blow it. He blew it by doing his crimes. There is absolutely nothing that hits lawyers can do to improve the situation. All they can do is work on sentencing, but my guess is, there is also little they can do there.
i think coffe zila needs to go to the cort roam XD
He went on Caroline’s first day of testimony I believe
He bought very expensive properties!
No…! Don’t blame his defense! Blame him. No one could help him. Attorney Johnny Cochran is dead!
Wang.
Zeke’s book is great. Michael Lewis mouth moves and flatulence comes out … yeah! Writing a letter to the jury? Plus a bunch of other dumbass stuff, I watched coffee, Zila’s reaction to Michael Lewis book.
Clearly the devil made him do it ....
Why does this geek not make a deal and get maybe 5 or 8 years because he doesn't fear the country club-type prison he'll go to as long as they give him a laptop? But this trial can get him 20 plus so it's odd he doesn't take a deal...Is it a good gamble?... Not according to this report.
He may not have been offered much or any of a deal based on reporting
The defense may as well subpoena Gary Gensler so that they could establish that Gensler thought Sam was a "good guy." Gensler could be asked if he had to choose between Sam or Logan Paul for advice in investing in cryptocurrency, would he not choose Sam? Also, the fact that Gary Gensler looks rather like the Golum in LORD OF THE RINGS, while Sam looks more like a Hobbit, might create unexpected sympathy for Sam. One juror can nullify a conviction, or cause a mistrial. Some people believe in Hobbits.
So here's what is going to happen:
Long Trial so lawyer's get paid.
Everyone loses all their money.
He goes to a minimum Fed pen. For about a year, and is told to pay back money, BUT NEVER DOES.
PLEASE, come back when its over to tell me how i did.
so the lawyer pulled an SBF on SBF. I will take your money upfront and siphoned them to my research side business.
Get rid of the courtroom reporter. He is unable to complete a sentence. He backtracks and inserts caveats compulsively. His thinking is confused with ideas intruding on the primary sentence which dilutes any conclusions, if in fact he drew any. "It's all interrelated and very incestuous". His final statement sums up his contribution, get rid of this guy.
Why Subtitles? Totally ruined your attempt at a video.
sir, you realize you are the one who controls if subtitles are on or not right ? lol lmao
SBF wants to date you