FTX

[nobody 2,667]

That girl what played the youngest daughter in Lord of the Rings could be the SBF girlfriend.

[Strike 5,532]

2 hours ago, TimHauck said:

Oh sh1t, he sent a draft?  Well I guess that settles it then.

No, the FACT that it was being reported all over the news yesterday before he got arrested proves it.  At some point, quit being an ignorant doosh.

https://duckduckgo.com/?t=ffab&q=sbf+testify+congress&ia=web

[TimHauck 2,850]

13 minutes ago, Strike said:

No, the FACT that it was being reported all over the news yesterday before he got arrested proves it.  At some point, quit being an ignorant doosh.

https://duckduckgo.com/?t=ffab&q=sbf+testify+congress&ia=web

So apparently there were supposed to be 2 hearings.  House today, Senate tomorrow.  One of the senators scheduled to question him clearly stated he had refused to testify for that.  Are we supposed to believe he would testify in front of the house but not the Senate?  Supposedly he had also renegged on testifying before the House on twitter spaces anyway prior to his arrest:

 

 

I’ll stop being a doosh to you if you admit you were wrong in the North Dakota thread (heck, I’ll even take “mistaken” as HT would say since you believed a liberal rag source)

[Strike 5,532]

2 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

So apparently there were supposed to be 2 hearings.  House today, Senate tomorrow.  One of the senators scheduled to question him clearly stated he had refused to testify for that.  Are we supposed to believe he would testify in front of the house but not the Senate?  Supposedly he had also renegged on testifying before the House on twitter spaces anyway prior to his arrest:

 

 

I’ll stop being a doosh to you if you admit you were wrong in the North Dakota thread (heck, I’ll even take “mistaken” as HT would say since you believed a liberal rag source)

1)  Quit trying to over complicate this.   You said he wasn't going to testify in front of congress.  And let's be clear.  The post you responded to said "congress" so don't hide behind the link you provided.  I then proved that he was in fact going to testify in front of congress.  You lose.

2)  I won't admit I'm wrong when I'm not.  If I'm ever wrong I'll be the first to admit it.  You should try it sometime though, since you're wrong constantly.

[Mr Fantasy 67]

8 hours ago, MDC said:

Big deal. Let’s focus on the real issues, like twerking kids and drag queen story hour.

I’d rather focus on Caroline Ellison twerking

[nobody 2,667]

7 minutes ago, Strike said:

1)  Quit trying to over complicate this.   You said he wasn't going to testify in front of congress.  And let's be clear.  The post you responded to said "congress" so don't hide behind the link you provided.  I then proved that he was in fact going to testify in front of congress.  You lose.

2)  I won't admit I'm wrong when I'm not.  If I'm ever wrong I'll be the first to admit it.  You should try it sometime though, since you're wrong constantly.

He admitted he was wrong on basic math skills in his haste to vilify Elon Musk.  I was pretty surprised about that honestly. 

[TimHauck 2,850]

9 minutes ago, Strike said:

1)  Quit trying to over complicate this.   You said he wasn't going to testify in front of congress.  And let's be clear.  The post you responded to said "congress" so don't hide behind the link you provided.  I then proved that he was in fact going to testify in front of congress.  You lose.

2)  I won't admit I'm wrong when I'm not.  If I'm ever wrong I'll be the first to admit it.  You should try it sometime though, since you're wrong constantly.

1) The first link was about the Senate.  The tweet was from someone with 50k followers who says he heard it straight from SBF was about Congress (others on twitter said this as well).  He may have been “planning” to testify for Congress, but changed his mind even before he got arrested.  You lose

2) I’d encourage you to read the police report I posted in that thread, detailing the timing of the calls to the mom compared to your claims.  You were wrong.  It’s okay to admit it, especially since your claim was solely based on a poorly researched article from CBS news.

[Strike 5,532]

1 minute ago, nobody said:

He admitted he was wrong on basic math skills in his haste to vilify Elon Musk.  I was pretty surprised about that honestly. 

Link?  I'd like to see that.  It would be a first.

[Hardcore troubadour 15,403]

Maxine Waters thought he was going to testify. She’s the one in charge.  

[Strike 5,532]

1 minute ago, TimHauck said:

1) The first link was about the Senate.  The tweet was from someone with 50k followers who says he heard it straight from SBF was about Congress (others on twitter said this as well).  He may have been “planning” to testify for Congress, but changed his mind even before he got arrested.  You lose

 

As I said, quit trying to over complicate this.  This is the post you responded to:

Quote

Well, since he was set to testify in front of congress again, mebbe they wanted to get him under wraps before he could spill the beans. 

That post is factually accurate, and your response was:

Quote

He wasn’t going to testify. 

You were wrong.  As I PROVED, he WAS going to testify in front of CONGRESS.  Take the L dude. 

 

[TimHauck 2,850]

3 minutes ago, nobody said:

He admitted he was wrong on basic math skills in his haste to vilify Elon Musk.  I was pretty surprised about that honestly. 

Yeah that was kinda embarrassing, especially since it was by RaiderHaters who might be the second worst person at math here after Timmy Smith.

I also was in the midst of admitting I got fooled into believing you could replant a cut down Christmas tree before digby peenied the thread because he fell for it.

[TimHauck 2,850]

1 minute ago, Strike said:

As I said, quit trying to over complicate this.  This is the post you responded to:

That post is factually accurate, and your response was:

You were wrong.  As I PROVED, he WAS going to testify in front of CONGRESS.  Take the L dude. 

 

Sure, at one point he “was.”  But then he changed his mind and then he wasn’t (prior to getting arrested)

[Strike 5,532]

Just now, TimHauck said:

Sure, at one point he “was.”  But then he changed his mind and then he wasn’t (prior to getting arrested)

I haven't seen this.  How about posting some links?  You know, like I do.

[TimHauck 2,850]

1 minute ago, Strike said:

I haven't seen this.  How about posting some links?  You know, like I do.

I did

[Strike 5,532]

Here's more Hack boy:

Quote

 

Sam Bankman-Fried said he expected to testify to Congress remotely from the Bahamas because of concerns over "paparazzi," in an interview with options flow platform Unusual Whales, on Monday, just hours before his arrest.

Bankman-Fried appeared in a Twitter Space with Unusual Whales while playing video games and said he would not be testifying to Congress in-person on Tuesday, and he would instead be "calling in," from his Bahamas home. When asked why, he said he was "quite overbooked" and cited security concerns about "paparazzi." 

 

https://www.businessinsider.com/sam-bankman-fried-said-hes-testify-from-home-before-arrest-2022-12

Take the L dude.

[Strike 5,532]

I'm posting links from credible news sources and Hack Boy is posting random tweets, but he thinks he's winning.

[frank 2,304]

KLF

EMF

DMC

[Hardcore troubadour 15,403]

2 minutes ago, frank said:

KLF

EMF

DMC

Unbelievable 

[frank 2,304]

1 minute ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Unbelievable 

Oh!

[TimHauck 2,850]

18 minutes ago, Strike said:

Here's more Hack boy:

https://www.businessinsider.com/sam-bankman-fried-said-hes-testify-from-home-before-arrest-2022-12

Take the L dude.

Looks like I was “‘mistaken.”  I saw it claimed that he said he would not be testifying in a Twitter spaces because he was “overbooked,” but couldn’t find the actual interview.  I assume it was the unusual whales one referenced, and he does say at that time he was still planning to (but being “overbooked” was why he claimed he would be doing it remotely).  Yes, I was wrong based on the last information we have, but he certainly might have changed his mind and it still seems odd that he would testify before the House but not the Senate.

Now your turn to admit you were wrong in the North Dakota thread.

[Strike 5,532]

20 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

Looks like I was “‘mistaken.”  I saw it claimed that he said he would not be testifying in a Twitter spaces because he was “overbooked,” but couldn’t find the actual interview.  I assume it was the unusual whales one referenced, and he does say at that time he was still planning to (but being “overbooked” was why he claimed he would be doing it remotely).  Yes, I was wrong based on the last information we have, but he certainly might have changed his mind and it still seems odd that he would testify before the House but not the Senate.

Now your turn to admit you were wrong in the North Dakota thread.

No, you were wrong.  I don't even know how you found that random tweet.  Were you just looking for ANYTHING so you could be contrary?  Have you looked at his other tweets?  Not exactly a "journalist."  If you've got a more credible link claiming SBF wasn't testifying feel free to post it.  But I assume if you had something credible you would have posted it in the first place.  So, as usual, you were wrong.  You should just admit it.

[TimHauck 2,850]

17 minutes ago, Strike said:

No, you were wrong.  I don't even know how you found that random tweet.  Were you just looking for ANYTHING so you could be contrary?  Have you looked at his other tweets?  Not exactly a "journalist."  If you've got a more credible link claiming SBF wasn't testifying feel free to post it.  But I assume if you had something credible you would have posted it in the first place.  So, as usual, you were wrong.  You should just admit it.

I was mainly wrong on the fact that I didn’t initially realize there were 2 separate hearings.   But I still would think if he was denying one that it doesn’t really make sense if he would do the other. 

But let’s move on, he wasn’t going to say anything that he hasn’t said in the other 50 interviews over the past couple weeks anyway.  The crypto people on twitter probably asked him better questions than any of the dinosaur politicians would have.  

I listened to part of the hearing today with the new CEO, which was a little interesting simply because he doesn’t really have to hold back much.  One interesting tidbit that came out was that he confirmed payments were made to SBF’s parents.

[Strike 5,532]

4 hours ago, TimHauck said:

I was mainly wrong on the fact that I didn’t initially realize there were 2 separate hearings.   

 

Uh, no, because you posted that stupid tweet from a nobody AFTER you knew there were two hearings.  You could have, at that point, cut your losses but you didn't.  You doubled down.

[TimHauck 2,850]

4 hours ago, Strike said:

Uh, no, because you posted that stupid tweet from a nobody AFTER you knew there were two hearings.  You could have, at that point, cut your losses but you didn't.  You doubled down.

No.  Once I realized that there were 2 different hearings, and it was confirmed (by the Senate) that he was refusing to testify for the Senate, I looked to see if there was more that mentioned both hearings, since the logical conclusion would be that if he was refusing to testify for one he would also refuse to testify for the other.  That was how I first saw someone claiming he said on a twitter spaces that he wasn’t going to testify for the house, after initially saying he would.  But the first tweet was from someone with not many followers, so then I searched “SBF testify spaces” or something which is how I found the other one but didn’t see anything where he actually said in there that he would do it (and again, I couldn’t initially find what interview they were referring to).

I stand by the fact that because he sent a “draft statement” doesn’t mean he was going to testify. The best evidence for that was what he did say in the twitter spaces interview, which appeared to be only a few hours before he was arrested.

But I still find it funny how are you are saying “I post real links!” when you fell for a poorly researched cbs article and for some reason are still standing by it even when it was confirmed wrong by the police report.

[TimHauck 2,850]

On 12/12/2022 at 7:29 PM, Mr Fantasy said:

Now that SBF is in custody the only thing I care going forward is who plays Caroline Ellison in the miniseries. There are 100 jabronis that could play Bankman

 

 

 

[RLLD 4,230]

I do look forward to learning more about this one, is this guy just someone’s useful idiot or was he playing games?

Moreover, does he get “Epstein’ed”, I have some doubts as there is no discernible link to the Clintons

[TimHauck 2,850]

26 minutes ago, RLLD said:

I do look forward to learning more about this one, is this guy just someone’s useful idiot or was he playing games?

Moreover, does he get “Epstein’ed”, I have some doubts as there is no discernible link to the Clintons

Yeah I’m not sure if they were defrauding people the whole time, or if they would’ve been OK if the value of their made up token didn’t tank.

But I’m guessing Ellison may have spilled the beans first.

 

 

 

[TimHauck 2,850]

Lol

 

 

 

[edjr 6,580]

Elon Musk can rest easy knowing he's not as big of a fraud as SBF

[RLLD 4,230]

It would be rather entertaining if it can be proven that this thing was was essentially a front for the Dem party to create campaign donations

[dogcows 1,030]

21 minutes ago, RLLD said:

It would be rather entertaining if it can be proven that this thing was was essentially a front for the Dem party to create campaign donations

The political contributions were made to politicians and PACs on both side of the aisle. But they were a drop in the bucket compared to how much he stole for lavish living and investing in his own hedge fund. Details on politicians that are donating his contributions to charity and those who aren’t doing anything (yet) here:

https://popular.info/p/updates-ftxs-dirty-money

[RLLD 4,230]

1 hour ago, dogcows said:

The political contributions were made to politicians and PACs on both side of the aisle. But they were a drop in the bucket compared to how much he stole for lavish living and investing in his own hedge fund. Details on politicians that are donating his contributions to charity and those who aren’t doing anything (yet) here:

https://popular.info/p/updates-ftxs-dirty-money

Wow. And this guy seems to be claiming ignorance?   

[Hardcore troubadour 15,403]

Lots of democrats and a very few rino dupes are hoping this blob gets Epsteined. 

[TimHauck 2,850]

1 hour ago, dogcows said:

The political contributions were made to politicians and PACs on both side of the aisle. But they were a drop in the bucket compared to how much he stole for lavish living and investing in his own hedge fund. Details on politicians that are donating his contributions to charity and those who aren’t doing anything (yet) here:

https://popular.info/p/updates-ftxs-dirty-money

Thanks for the link.  I would echo a common comment on there…why would they (both Dems and Republicans that received donations) donate them to charity instead of holding onto them for the victims of the fraud?

[Frozenbeernuts 2,254]

57 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Lots of democrats and a very few rino dupes are hoping this blob gets Epsteined. 

His parents seem very well connected. I would be really surprised if he was. It would be pretty obvious, and I can't see his parents going along with something like that. Of course I don't know them and maybe they are straight psychopaths

[Frozenbeernuts 2,254]

58 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Lots of democrats and a very few rino dupes are hoping this blob gets Epsteined. 

The liberals: SBF donated to Republicans also!

Also liberals: Twitter censored democrats also!

Ok puddin, the ratio was like 100:1 in both cases

[dogcows 1,030]

22 minutes ago, Frozenbeernuts said:

The liberals: SBF donated to Republicans also!

Also liberals: Twitter censored democrats also!

Ok puddin, the ratio was like 100:1 in both cases

Nope. But tell me more about how Republicans are constantly victims. What a whiny bunch of snowflakes. 

[Frozenbeernuts 2,254]

2 minutes ago, dogcows said:

Nope. But tell me more about how Republicans are constantly victims. What a whiny bunch of snowflakes. 

You didn't see how Twitter overwhelmingly silenced non left wing voices? How they had so much trouble banning posts involving human traffickers, but mention one thing about the vaccine that the libs didn't approve of and Twitter knew about it instantly? You just haven't been paying attention. You are on the side with the sissy snowflake trannies and pedos. Not me. And I'm not even a conservative nor will I ever be

[TimHauck 2,850]

1 hour ago, Frozenbeernuts said:

The liberals: SBF donated to Republicans also!

Also liberals: Twitter censored democrats also!

Ok puddin, the ratio was like 100:1 in both cases

The ratio was more like 1:1 for SBF donations if it’s true he donated dark money to Republicans (and I think the indictments believe that to be the case).   And for FTX as a whole even based on official amounts it was only about 3:2 driven by co-CEO Ryan Salame’s donations to Republicans (his girlfriend also ran for office and was endorsed by Trump Jr).  C’mon I thought you were supposed to be the crypto expert.

[Hardcore troubadour 15,403]

The house committee overseeing the FTX issue had 11 members get money from SBF. 8 democrats and 3 republicans.   The democrats are neck deep in this, thus he was silenced. I can only imagine what the dark money looks like. Speculation is a large majority also went to democrats. SBF only trailed Soros in donations to democrats.