FTX’s Sam Bankman-Fried Pushes New Trial Narrative With Disputed Claims on X

FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried has launched a fresh public campaign on X that appears aimed at reinforcing his request for a new trial. However, several of the claims he is using to argue his innocence conflict with court records and established facts.

The posts, published days after filings seeking a retrial, frame Bankman-Fried as a victim of politically motivated “lawfare,” alleging misconduct by prosecutors, judicial bias, and retaliation against former FTX executives.

Yet, a review of the claims shows repeated factual errors and logical gaps.

Claims of Gag Orders and Judicial Bias

Bankman-Fried claims both he and Donald Trump were “gagged” by Judge Lewis Kaplan.

Court records show this comparison is inaccurate. Kaplan presided over Trump’s civil defamation case and imposed courtroom conduct limits, not a formal public gag order. 

In reality, Trump’s criminal gag orders were issued by other judges in unrelated cases.

In contrast, Bankman-Fried was subject to a criminal gag order after repeated violations of pretrial release conditions — a standard judicial response.

Repeating Solvency Arguments Rejected at Trial

Bankman-Fried again asserts that FTX “was always solvent” and that prosecutors falsely claimed customer funds were stolen.

That argument was central to his defense at trial and was rejected by a jury, which found that customer assets were misused and misrepresented. 

Also, federal courts have consistently ruled that post-collapse asset recoveries do not retroactively establish solvency at the time of misuse.

Mischaracterizing Prosecutorial Actions

Bankman-Fried also claims Trump “fired” one of his prosecutors, former SDNY official Danielle Sassoon.

Public records show Sassoon resigned after refusing a DOJ directive in an unrelated corruption case. She was not dismissed, and her departure had no direct connection to the FTX prosecution.

Linking DOJ Actions to Politics and Crypto Regulation

Several posts allege the Biden administration targeted him because he opposed Gary Gensler, donated to Republicans, and represented crypto interests.

While Bankman-Fried was active in Washington, no court filings or rulings have supported claims that political donations or regulatory lobbying drove the prosecution. 

Judges ruled the case on documentary evidence, internal messages, and witness testimony. 

In fact, the FTX founder himself directly donated to Joe Biden’s campaign.

Bankman-Fried also defends former FTX co-CEO Ryan Salame, claiming he was coerced into pleading guilty and barred from presenting exculpatory evidence.

Salame pleaded guilty to campaign finance and money-transmission violations and has acknowledged those pleas in court. His sentencing record shows no judicial finding that evidence was unlawfully suppressed.

The post FTX’s Sam Bankman-Fried Pushes New Trial Narrative With Disputed Claims on X appeared first on BeInCrypto.