Convicted FTX CEO SBF Cries ‘Biden Lawfare’ In Trump Pardon Pitch

bitcoinistPublicado a 2026-02-10Actualizado a 2026-02-10

Resumen

Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF) claimed in a February 9th X thread that his criminal conviction was part of "Biden’s political lawfare," comparing his case to those of Donald Trump and former FTX executive Ryan Salame in what many interpreted as a direct appeal for a future pardon. He argued that the Biden administration and the DOJ brought bogus charges and prevented him from presenting evidence, specifically claiming the court "gagged" him and hid proof that FTX was solvent and that no money was stolen. SBF criticized Judge Lewis Kaplan, who also presided over a Trump case, for rubber-stamping DOJ requests and imposing a gag order. He drew parallels between his pretrial detention and Trump's legal battles. The thread was widely seen as a political maneuver rather than a legal argument, with critics accusing him of angling for a pardon from Trump.

Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF) used a new X thread on Feb. 9 to reframe his criminal case as “Biden’s political lawfare,” positioning himself alongside Donald Trump and former FTX executive Ryan Salame in what read like a direct appeal for a future pardon.

“Biden’s lawfare machine threw bogus charges at me, Donald Trump, Ryan Salame, etc.,” Bankman-Fried wrote. “To make the charges stick, they prevented us from even being allowed to respond.” He opened with a blunt claim about process rather than facts: “Rule No. 1 of Biden’s political lawfare: Don’t let them present evidence.”

SBF Cries ‘Gagged Trial,’ Claims DOJ Hid Evidence

SBF’s argument hinges on the idea that authorities and the court curtailed what the jury could hear. He repeatedly singled out Judge Lewis Kaplan, who presided over his trial, claiming the court “rubber-stamped everything Biden’s DOJ wanted” and “made sure I couldn’t show the jury the truth.”

The “truth,” as SBF cast it, is a solvency narrative: “So they lied, said I stole billions of dollars and bankrupted FTX. But the money was always there and FTX was always solvent.” He also argued that restrictions prevented him from advancing that line at trial, writing that he was “prohibited” from “pointing out FTX was solvent” and from “even mentioning lawyers.”

In the thread, SBF linked to a court filing he said was authored by his prosecutor, “Sassoon,” describing it as “a 70-page document on all the evidence they didn’t want the jury to see,” and he framed the episode as part of a broader political effort to “silence the truth.”

A significant chunk of the thread is dedicated to Trump’s New York hush-money bookkeeping case, which Bankman-Fried portrayed as a routine classification dispute blown into criminality. “Charged him with 34 crimes over his bookkeeping of an NDA expense—should it be legal, campaign, or personal?,” he wrote. “These questions come up all the time when you’re running a business, and it’s often unclear.”

He then drew a parallel between court-imposed limits on Trump and his own pre-trial detention. “They then got the judge to impose a gag order on Donald Trump,” he wrote. “Biden’s DOJ silenced me, too—getting Judge Kaplan to gag and then jail me before trial. President Trump also had Kaplan as a judge.”

Bankman-Fried also amplified Salame’s complaints about licensing advice and charging decisions, alleging prosecutors leaned on pressure tactics to force a plea, including claims involving Salame’s fiancée, assertions presented as fact in the thread but not accompanied by supporting documentation beyond links to Salame’s posts.

The reaction underneath was unsparing, with multiple industry figures interpreting the thread less as a legal critique than a political pitch. “You’re a Delusional criminal who is now angling for a pardon,” wrote trader Bob Loukas. Attorney Ariel Givner was even more direct: “We GET it. You want a pardon from Trump.”

At press time, FTT traded at $0.3021.

FTT continues its freefall, 1-week chart | Source: FTTUSDT on TradingView.com

Preguntas relacionadas

QWhat is the main argument in his recent X thread regarding his criminal case?

AHe argues that his criminal case is 'Biden's political lawfare,' claiming the Biden administration prevented him from presenting evidence and responding to the charges.

QWho did SBF specifically single out as being responsible for curtailing what the jury could hear in his trial?

AHe singled out Judge Lewis Kaplan, claiming the judge 'rubber-stamped everything Biden's DOJ wanted' and ensured he 'couldn't show the jury the truth.'

QWhat does SBF claim was the 'truth' about FTX that he was prevented from presenting in court?

AHe claims the 'truth' was that 'the money was always there and FTX was always solvent,' and he was prohibited from pointing this out or even mentioning lawyers.

QHow does SBF attempt to draw a parallel between his own case and that of former President Donald Trump?

AHe draws a parallel by claiming both were subjected to Biden's 'lawfare machine,' faced gag orders and pre-trial detention, and were prevented from presenting evidence, noting that Trump also had Judge Kaplan in one of his cases.

QHow did some industry figures interpret SBF's thread, according to the article?

AIndustry figures like trader Bob Loukas and attorney Ariel Givner interpreted it less as a legal critique and more as a political pitch, specifically an attempt to angle for a pardon from Donald Trump.

Lecturas Relacionadas

Ripple MiCA Authorization Opens A Wider European Payments Lane

Ripple has obtained full MiCA (Markets in Crypto-Assets) authorization in Europe. This regulatory approval provides a clearer path for Ripple's corporate payment entity to offer crypto-enabled payment services across the European Union and European Economic Area. It is important to note that this authorization specifically applies to Ripple's business operations under MiCA, not a blanket endorsement of XRP trading itself. The authorization is significant for Ripple's strategy, as the unified MiCA framework simplifies scaling across Europe for compliant firms. This regulatory clarity can facilitate partnerships with banks, payment providers, and institutional clients by addressing compliance concerns. While the development supports the broader XRP narrative by reducing regulatory uncertainty for Ripple's core payments business, it does not directly translate to regulatory approval for XRP as an investment product. The true impact on XRP will depend on whether this regulatory milestone leads to increased adoption, new client partnerships, and greater payment volume in European corridors. The approval reflects a broader trend where crypto firms are seeking regulatory footing in Europe due to MiCA's comprehensive rulebook, contrasting with the uncertain regulatory landscape in the United States. Ultimately, the license is a permission to operate; its success hinges on Ripple's ability to convert this regulatory advantage into tangible business growth and adoption.

bitcoinistHace 24 min(s)

Ripple MiCA Authorization Opens A Wider European Payments Lane

bitcoinistHace 24 min(s)

Trading

Spot
活动图片