Here is the indictment document...
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.59...
When the newspaper was the only way to get current information at all, the journalistic integrity of the MSM mattered a lot more. But now, they know they can put whatever sensationalist, reality-bubble spin they want on any event, and face 0 consequences while driving tons of page views. So unfortunately I'd expect this to continue and probably intensify.
>CC-1 ultimately became-at least in name--one of the largest Democratic donors in the 2022 midterm elections and made donations to further BANKMAN-FRIED's agenda that CCI otherwise would not have made.
This is worse than election rigging. There are reasons there are donation limits, and this dude deliberately, knowingly went around them to help the Democrats in the midterms.
…and Republicans. CC-1 was the cutout for SBF’s donations to Democrats to the left of his preferred public image as a center-right Democrat, CC-2 was the cutout for SBF’s donations to Republicans to the right of that preferred public image.
37. Likewise, it was the preference of SAMUEL BANKMAN-FRIED, a/k/a "SBF," the defendant, to keep contributions to Republicans "dark." In keeping with that preference, CC2, who publicly aligned himself with conservatives, made contributions to Republican candidates that were directed by BANKMAN-FRIED and funded by Alameda.
Why are you only complaining about one side of his secret and illegal political activity and not the other? You quoted from paragraphs 35 and 41 of the indictment (though you reversed their order), so you must have passed over the paragraph above when you read it.
So yes, it's a either a journalistic failure or deliberate obfuscation.
Dark money donations aren’t, that’s why they are called “dark money”.
> So yes, it’s a either a journalistic failure or deliberate obfuscation.
Right. The whole purpose was deliberate obfuscation by SBF, and there is continued (though routine in a criminal investigation) obfuscation by the DoJ, which has filed charges based on its penetration of SBF’s obfuscation, but not provided breakdowns by party publicly.
The non-dark money portions could be approximately pieced together from public info using the (likely correct) conclusions as to who CC-1 and CC-2 are and their public donations during the time in question (not perfect, because its possible that each also made donations that were not part of the SBF scam in the same time period), but that doesn’t really help since it doesn’t account for the dark money portion.