FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried has launched a new public campaign on X that seems aimed at reinforcing his plea for a new trial. However, several claims he has made in support of his innocence are in contradiction with court documents and established facts.
Publications that appeared a few days after the motions for the renewal of the trial present Bankman-Fried as a politically motivated victim of a 'legal war' and accuse the prosecutors of unethical conduct, the judge's bias, and revenge against former FTX officials.
A closer examination of the claims reveals repeated false assertions as well as logical deficiencies.
Claims of publication bans and judicial bias
Bankman-Fried claims that both he and Donald Trump would have been 'gagged' by Judge Lewis Kaplan.
The legal documents indicate that this comparison is not accurate. Kaplan served as the judge in Trump's civil defamation case and only restricted behavior in the courtroom, not issuing a public gag order.
In practice, Trump's criminal gag orders provided other judges in other cases.
Instead, Bankman-Fried was subject to a criminal gag order because he repeatedly violated conditions of his release on bail – which is standard practice in court.
Repeated solvency arguments were dismissed in the trial
Bankman-Fried again asserts that FTX 'was always solvent' and that prosecutors falsely claimed that customer funds had fallen into the wrong hands.
This was based on the core of his defense in the trial, but the jury rejected the claim noting that client funds were misused and their existence was misrepresented.
Additionally, federal courts have consistently assessed that the assets recovered after the company's collapse do not retroactively prove solvency at the time of the misconduct.
Misrepresentation of the prosecutor's actions
Bankman-Fried also claims that Trump 'fired' one of his prosecutors, former SDNY official Danielle Sassoon.
Public records indicate that Sassoon resigned after refusing to comply with a DOJ order in a separate corruption investigation. She was not removed, and her departure was not directly related to the FTX trial.
DOJ's actions, policy, and cryptocurrency regulation
Several publications claim that the Biden administration targeted him because he opposed Gary Gensler, donated to Republicans, and represented the interests of the cryptocurrency sector.
Bankman-Fried was active in Washington, but no court documents or rulings have supported the claim that political donations or influencing legislation were the cause of the charges.
Judges resolved the case based on document evidence, internal communications, and witness testimonies.
In fact, the founder of FTX directly donated to Joe Biden's campaign.
Bankman-Fried also defends former FTX co-CEO Ryan Salame, claiming that Salame was forced to plead guilty and was not allowed to present exculpatory evidence.
Salame admitted his guilt to campaign finance and money transmission violations and has acknowledged these in court. There is no information from his rulings indicating that evidence was unlawfully excluded from consideration.