SBF's first prison interview: I was targeted by the Ministry of Justice for donating money to the Republican Party and begged the Chief of Sichuan University to pardon

Interviewer: Ari Hoffman, Associate Editor of The New York Sun

Compilation and Organization: Comparison of BitpushNews

Sam Bankman-Fried elaborated on his views on the bankruptcy of FTX, the legal struggle, the political situation in the United States, and the future of the cryptocurrency industry. He insisted that FTX never went bankrupt, but only encountered a liquidity crisis, criticized FTX's bankruptcy administrator and the injustice of the US judicial system, his case was "sacrifice" of the political struggle, and expressed his possible pardon for President Trump. and cautious expectations for the future. He also shared some personal insights, such as the experience of falling to the bottom from one of the richest people in the world.

The following is a review of the full text of the interview. For the sake of reading, the dialogue content of the interview video has been moderately sorted out.

AH: Hi Sam, here is Ari. I'm glad to talk to you. We have limited time, so I want to get straight into the topic. I know you have some opinions about the current political environment, especially about pardon. Plus, your prosecutor, Danielle Sassoon, has also been in the spotlight recently. Why not talk about your thoughts first?

SBF: Of course, a lot has happened lately. As you mentioned, my attorney Danielle Sasson has made the news recently due to a dispute with the Trump Justice Department. My then-Judge Kaplan was also a Trump-appointed New York judge, which involved a larger political struggle, the incoming Trump Department of Justice (DOJ) and what they saw Biden justice conflicts between departments (DOJs).

This situation is compounded by President Trump’s perception of the Justice Department, coupled with some in his camp’s distrust of the judicial system. They believe that the Department of Justice has become increasingly politicized over the past few decades, especially recently.

AH: Do you think your case is related to this political struggle?

SBF: That's really part of it, and of course, there are a lot of other factors. This often happens in high-profile trials, and the careers of all relevant officials are affected. I don't think my case has been tried fairly and impartially, especially some rulings in the court.

For example, the judge allowed the prosecutor to tell the jury that "all investors' money is gone", but at the same time, my defense team did not allow it to refute it. The truth is, it was not the fact at all. This became a key point in the trial , and the story heard by the jury is wrong.

AH: What do you think of the recent turmoil in the Department of Justice, especially the South District Court (SDNY)? Do you think your case also involves the prosecutor's dereliction of duty?

SBF: I think there are some similarities. For example, you can look at the sentencing situations received by all those who plead guilty. We have a Republican who pleaded only a small number of charges but was sentenced to seven and a half years in prison — a sentence of four times the other three combined. Meanwhile, other people who plead guilty seem to be treated more relaxedly, and the difference in sentencing is very obvious.

Additionally, prosecutors threatened his wife, saying they would file a lawsuit against her if he didn't cooperate, who was then a Republican congressman candidate. This approach is very political.

AH: In the media, you are portrayed as a rich man who primarily funded the Democratic Party, and donations to the Republican Party are only symbolic. Do you think there is a misunderstanding of your political stance?

SBF: This is actually two-sided. In 2020, I did give a lot of donations to the Biden camp, but in part because I don’t want the Democrats to become a party led by Bernie Sanders. However, by 2022, my political stance has changed.

I spent a lot of time working in Washington with lawmakers, regulators and executives, especially in crypto policy. I'm very disappointed with the Biden administration and the Democratic Party, especially on the issue of cryptocurrency regulation. Their policies are devastating for the industry as a whole. The Republican Party is relatively easier to cooperate. So, my time in Washington is spent more on the Republican Party trying to stop the Democratic administration from taking over regulatory measures. The Biden administration is very destructive and difficult to cooperate. Frankly, the Republican Party is more rational. I spent a lot of time in Washington, D.C. and did my best to hope to cross partisan boundaries and prevent the government from taking harsh measures against the industry.

AH: People have discussed a lot of changes in the atmosphere of tech giants, like Zuckerberg and Bezos, who you should have had an intersection with, and you think if the trial didn't happen to you, you would be at the inauguration. On stage? Or, let me ask in another way, have you seen what is going on? do you understand? Or, or how do you think of it?

SBF: I obviously can't speak for them, but I think they've seen something the same thing I've seen in the past four years. You see, Zuckerberg expressed some of the original intentions of a reasonable, constructive, false information position about the government, which eventually turned into something more just political censorship. I think they have had some similar setbacks when working with the Biden administration, like a lot of people in the crypto industry finds, anything related to business and ultimately freedom of speech.

AH: Do you think your trial is used as a political tool?

SBF: I think it is to some extent. Many high-profile cases have similar situations, involving the prosecutor's career, media attention and political influence. I don't think it's a fair trial.

AH: How do you think of politicians issuing meme coins? Well, have you heard of TRUMP coins? That was released before the inauguration.

SBF: I've heard of it, but I don't know that much about it because, you know, my source of information is somewhat limited in prison. But I'm not surprised to see politicians getting into the digital realm, you know, I expect over time we'll see more and more areas of life getting into the dive, partly because, compared to traditional finance , it is a more flexible medium. That's why the industry is growing so rapidly and innovating so much, and there are many reasons, but one of the reasons is that it's much easier to build things in it. Infrastructure is updated and more open.

AH: How do you view bankruptcy proceedings? Do you think FTX is really bankrupt?

SBF: FTX never went bankrupt. This is a liquidity crisis, not an insolvency issue. We had enough assets to repay all our clients’ funds at the time. But the process has become extremely slow and even misleading the public due to the law firm's takeover and their handling.

Clients could have regained their funds in November 2022. But it took the bankruptcy administrator two years to admit that there was enough funds. They initially claimed only $1 billion in assets, but now they have found $15 billion in assets. This is a total management failure.

AH: What do you think about the use of funds for FTX and Alameda Research?

SBF: FTX is a leveraged trading platform in which customers trade margin. Alameda Research is the main market maker of FTX and plays an important role in the market.

All asset flows can be found in the financial statements. We have a clear record of assets and liabilities, and at any time, our assets are always greater than liabilities. The problem is that the liquidity crisis has caused market panic, making it impossible for funds to be cashed out quickly.

AH: Do you think you have been wrongly convicted?

SBF: Absolutely. Obviously, I will have something different when looking back on past decisions. But the most important thing is that I should insist on not letting Sullvan & Cromwell law firm take over FTX in November 2022. I should continue to deal with liquidity issues, rather than letting them completely mislead clients after taking over. But I didn't. You know, after that, it was a painful few years of waiting, not only I was waiting, but millions of customers were waiting, they were wrongly told that there was no money left and hadn't received any payment until recently.

This has resulted in millions of customers having to wait two years to get back their funds, and in fact, their funds should be safe from the start.

AH: I think for most people, you know, the amount of money you have and deal with is almost unimaginable. What is your relationship with money? I mean, there are a lot of articles about your interest in effective altruism, and all sorts of other things, but you know, from one perspective, what it feels like to have that much money? What about the experience of losing them all the time?

SBF: I basically divided it into two categories, one is my own livelihood, such as personal consumption. From this perspective, my life has not changed much. You know, I live on my salary, it's a pretty salary, $200,000 a year, but not billions. I haven't changed so much about my lifestyle, I really don't have that much temptation, I never really understood the meaning of a yacht. It was never something I was really interested in, instead, what I thought of was my impact on the world.

I basically look at it from an effective altruist perspective, that is, I have a lot of money to donate, and what do I think I can do the most beneficial thing with it? Some of it is used for, you know, health causes around the world, people, you know, dying from diseases that shouldn't have died again, malaria is just one of them. Some are used for animal welfare causes, some are used for pandemic prevention, and a variety of other causes. Of course, some are used in politics. That's what I think about on a bigger scale because frankly, you know, there are billions of people in the world, you know, there are millions of people who die every year from neglected tropical diseases, and it's one you Areas that can be truly thought on a very large scale, and billions of dollars can actually be used meaningfully in terms of funding.

AH: If you can get freedom, what plans do you have?

SBF: You know, money is not the most important thing. I don’t miss money, freedom is. At present, I am still waiting for the result of the appeal. If successful, I will reinvest in meaningful work, especially in the fields of technology and finance.

AH: If you find yourself free again, in any way, I mean, what do you think, what might you do? Want to go back to the cryptocurrency world?

SBF: Obviously, it's very far away, and I'll think about what I want to do in the future, even when that time comes, I try not to think too much now because I can't do anything about it.

AH: What do you miss the most in prison?

SBF: Free. What I miss most is the ability to obtain information and make decisions at any time. I have been trying to build something new in the past, and now I can only wait passively.

AH: What are your plans next? Well, right away, do you have any plans for the next few weeks and months? Does it feel like there is no difference, or does it feel like there is a narrative arc?

SBF: You know, life is pretty dull, well, there is nothing to do in prison. Well, you know, I'm used to working hard and there's nothing to do here. However, from a high-level perspective, one thing is definitely in front of me, and that is the solution to my appeal. Well, we have verbal debates, you know, in the next, you know, maybe three to six months. Well, you know, I feel cautiously optimistic, but the odds are always bad for anyone working in the federal criminal justice system. So, being cautiously optimistic just means I think there is a chance and hope that judges can be open and give a careful and critical look at what is happening. Apart from that, prisoners don’t really have control over their lives, so a lot of things happen to me, not to me.

AH: Thank you, Sam. I hope you can get a fair result as soon as possible.