The FTX scam, Sam Bankman-Fried, the Clintons and the Democrats

Man I hope I am as in good of shape as Hils when I get to be her age. I mean she has to be up 22 hours a day to be controlling all these conspiracies she is involved in.

 

. Actually My posts point out the half-assed / sleight-of-hand reporting by your source, one that you used to start this thread.

Quintessential willfully ignorance !

 

Pedo Pizza. Have an 18" pepperoni and 8 year old delivered in 30 minutes or less or they're free!

 

Its glorious.

CZ/Binance rug pulled FTX. CZ/Binance buddies with Elon and Twitter, including a 500MM stake in Twitter. Now SEC and Democrats looks silly and toothless thanks to CZ. Now Tesla going private @420 again.

 

I was talking about conspiracy theory - but good, let's remove that thread.

To summarize,
1- The chair of the SEC (Gary Gensler) job is to know this. I have some basic questions - what is this that he should know and why is it the SEC's job to know? My guess is you are talking about the requirement that the trading platform needs to have enough liquidity to match customer deposits (in case they want to withdraw). Is this right?

2- FTX allegedly improperly loaned customer funds to Alameda Research (the sister company to FTX) which uses that for trading. This seems illegal (if customers are not made aware) but I'm not sure of the law. I wouldn't expect the SEC to know this unless they were actively investigating Alameda.

3- FTX allegedly has a "backdoor" or some security holes that allow funds to be withdrawn without notice. This sounds illegal if intentional. I wouldn't expect the SEC to know this.

4- FTX allegedly mislead the public with their public financial data. I'm sure this is illegal if intentional.

5- Alameda has a majority net equity made up of FTX tokens (worthless in other words). I don't know if this is legal or just dirty. And I don't know if the SEC can know this also.

There is very little regulation and oversight over crypto. This highlight the risk. While we may say the SEC should do this or that, to me, that's not the answer or even the right place to look for what went wrong. There need to be more oversight and regulation of the industry to protect consumer/investors. This might not even fall under the SEC or a combination of the SEC and commodity trading oversight.

Source:
https://www.nerdwallet.com/article/investing/ftx-crash

 

Bitcoin the asset can be copied all day long.

Bitcoin the network ..... good luck.

 

Yep. The code can be copied. The circumstances cannot.

 

Good topic (ignore the wild conspiracy).

 

Lets parse this in a different way.
The Celsius/Three Arrows capital was doing the same thing, except they were downstream to FTX. Why did the government turn a blind eye to FTX when consumers just lost billions in these yield ponzi scams 4 months ago??? I am not calling for conspiracy stories, but greed, corruption and self preservation.

Each of your points are valid. Yes, the SEC and everyone else can be bamboozled on each of those accounts you listed. However this is a full bouquet of red flags. Even the degen Bitcoin Maxi's kept asking everyone where they thought these yield products were earning the rewards. It was blatantly obvious to know 8% yields on crypto was a complete fraud when the bond market has been tanking over the last year.

Why was USD/Ukrainian money being funneled through FTX with absolutely no oversight in FTX operations? Political parties should not be taking money from unregulated markets. Plain and simple.

 

That's a good question. Right now I'm chalking it up to no clear definition of responsibility - who watches these guys and what to watch for? I think that needs to be defined so we have both some agency watching (but not to the point of stiffing innovation) and being accountable for that.

I have a stronger stance - political parties should not be taking money from any markets IMO, directly or indirectly.

 

Anyone REALLY paying attention had to have serious reservations about FTX. Things just didn't add up. However, the sheer GREEDY and desire to become rich with little work almost always wins out. We saw this with Madoff and countless others, and with the Wall Street crash several times over.

I understand the reasons behind a lack of regulation, but things like this are a consequence.

 

For all of Hillary Clinton's faults being lazy isn't one of them.

 

I admit to not understanding a lot of terms and names thrown around in this thread. That just gives me more justification for never getting involved in Crypto. A lot of this really reminds me of the 2008 with all the talk of credit default swaps and other financial instruments that it didn't seem like many people understood.

 

Meh, I am open to the possibility of what is essentially a conspiracy theory when it comes to financial incentives because people (especially in finance) are largely motivated by money.

However, this connection isn't mind blowing, as in many cases, business is really about being in the right circles and who you know.

Do I think that people in positions of power knew? I think that in the economic sphere especially, and in business in general there is a turn a blind eye mentality. So I don't know how many people in positions of power knew for sure, but I am sure a number of them assumed something was amiss and purposely did not get involved.

This is how every one of these scams in Wall Street and finances end. Everyone is upset, no one takes responsibility and then later there are some people in positions of power say "well I was, and anyone really involved had to be suspicious."

Some people at the top go to jail or kill themselves, and a bunch of ""silent" people on the edges makes a lot of money.

 

How much if any of the Texas power grid was wasted on bitcoin that's lost as a result of this?

 

Crypto currency isn't something to be involved in unless you have a real intuitive and complete understanding of it. Yet, it becomes a fad and there are reports of huge profits and people get involved well over their head, and lose money.

It is timeless, we had people in the 1910-1920's dumping life savings into the Stock Market with zero understanding of it. Farmers lost their family farms over it.... and at the end of the day, a very small group of white men, with insider trading made a fortune off of it all and were hailed as hero's and experts when they were really no different than a casino playing with weighted dice.

 

These are both facts.

However, that doesn't mean that there was some sort of secret agreement with Biden or the DNC to willfully overlook all of this.

The reality is that businesses with the assets donate to politicians that are more supportive philosophically to their particular causes.

I don't really see how this should be Biden-centric. That is the only real issue with it.

History and human nature tell us that people were suspicious and purposely turned a blind eye.

 

https://www.wallstreetmojo.com/bitc...he first-ever,also be called a cryptocurrency.

Bitcoin is the first-ever cryptocurrency that Satoshi Nakamoto founded in 2008. It started as open-source software to transfer money.

Bitcoin is a digital currency that can also be called a cryptocurrency.​

 

That's often the deliberate intent behind a lot of investments like the stock market. Make it so deliberately convoluted and confusing that the argument is forced upon you that only experts in economics should be the one's to have the most decision making power. I find the same with crypto as well. Ultimately, there's a lot of middle aged men with disposable income and a severe distrust for government and banking institutions from both political parties that have sought out an alternative they're likely so heavily invested in they can't back out even if they really wanted to.

I think the fault with crypto proponents that find themselves critical of big banks is the fault in believing that it's the outside words of the building that say Bank that make it an evil entity compared to "sound" money. The problem isn't the word bank outside the building. The problems chiefly are the ethics of the people that operate inside the building and the financial systems they operate in that encourages more unethical behavior for personal gain at the greater behest of the overall population.

To assume crypto isn't without it's own equally self serving people who designed an alternative financial system that will have them gain the most out of it more than anyone else, including likely middle aged men in this thread with disposable income, is foolish. They will profit most, while you won't and when a big scandal happens and everything is lost, they are more likely to retain their wealth while you won't. Yet, there's continued support for a broken system that people at this point admit is broken, but dammit, it's their broken system and there's no backing out now.

Ethical people construct ethical systems that take into consideration the long term ramifications of their actions and what outcomes will likely be yielded from it. This clearly is not the case within crypto or greater overall financial investment sector as the system makes it so easy for instances like these to become such common headlines that they compete with the Rockets lose another regular season match or mass shooting occurred at SomeLocation, USA.

 

"But he donated to gop too!11!"