Pretty much what the title says. I know he’s a former president and has all of his supporters, but what’s the official reason? Thanks.

  • Chef@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    94
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    I understand what you’re saying but the logic is a little flawed.

    Yes, they both committed fraud.

    SBF defrauded the crypto community, his investors, and FTX users.

    Trump defrauded lenders, property insurers, and various tax authorities (and via that tax fraud, the taxpayers of NY and possibly the USA.)

    SBF was charged criminally and found guilty. I assure you, the civil cases are coming against SBF. And the plaintiffs will most likely win those civil cases.

    Trump was charged civilly and found guilty. I assure you, the criminal cases are coming against Trump. And the plaintiffs will most likely lose those criminal cases.

    That’s the true difference.

    • Skullgrid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      I assure you, the criminal cases are coming against Trump

      Fucking when, after he becomes president again and pardons himself, or after he croaks from obesity and dementia?

    • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      the criminal cases are coming against Trump. And the plaintiffs will most likely lose those criminal cases.

      Bank fraud seems relatively easy to charge him with. If you knowingly provide false info on a bank document, it’s a federal crime. His signature on each loan application was a crime.

      You can’t tell the State of NY your building is worth $1 and tell the bank it’s worth $3. These banks literally had a procedure for dealing with his constant lies on bank documents. Large banks are federally regulated and it’s a federal crime to lie to them on your loan application.

  • katy ✨@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 months ago

    they’re both terrible people who deserve everything they get but sbf didn’t nominate judges to the court who can rule in his favour.

    • Gristle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Sam didn’t spring for the ad-free tier and now has to have his time wasted?

  • HopeOfTheGunblade@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Civil vs Criminal. Trump got a disgorgement, it’s not a fine. He’s been ordered to pay back his ill-gotten gains, that’s not the same thing as a fine. Anyhow, a civil case can’t end in jail time. That’s not how civil cases work.

  • Adderbox76@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 months ago

    It’s not federal vs state

    It’s protected vs sacrificial lamb.

    The powerful avoid the mobs by occasionally giving up one of their own to the horde.

      • MutilationWave@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Just because the powerful enjoy breaking laws with impunity doesn’t mean occasionally people won’t try to hold them to account.

        In Trump’s case even powerful wealthy people think he went too far, and some of them are terrified of the consequences of a second term.

    • Professorozone@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      Yeah but that was what I was asking. They both committed fraud. I realize the nature of the fraud was different but was wondering why one was criminal and the other not. They seem to have jumped on Fried pretty quickly and gave him a high penalty. It seems pretty obvious that Trump is a former president of but he’s being prosecuted for other criminal charges so it seemed to me there must have been some crucial difference the two, other than their standing.

  • IvanOverdrive@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 months ago

    It’s a matter of privilege. Trump had the opportunity to stack the courts in his favor. SBF didn’t. The rich rally around Trump because they see him as one of their own. SBF was an interloper. Trump has a rabid fan base willing to commit violence in his name. SBF cloaked himself in effective altruism.

    If they both don’t rot in jail, then the myth of the social contract in the US will be torn to shreds. I fear what would happen after that.

  • itsgroundhogdayagain@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Trump defrauded the state/city/taxpayers while Bankman defrauded rich investors. Also, the aforementioned civil vs criminal cases.

  • MiltownClowns@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Mainly because Trump can start riots with a word and nobody gives a fuck about Sam Bankman Fraud. Obviously the cases are different, but the reason the approach is different is the aforementioned riots and possible civil war.

      • MiltownClowns@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        I understand, but that’s the reason. Even though legally he may have defrauded a bunch of people, they can’t go after him as hard, because he can set the country on fire with a word. That’s why no matter what he does, he seems to get away with it. He’s not bulletproof. It’s just that if you take a shot and miss, you’re gonna kill innocent civilians.

  • Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    SBF was a poor who got money through a fluke. Trump was born a rich and therefore the system is set up to protect him. Poors are not allowed to become riches unless they got it from exploiting the poors. Steal from the rich: that’s theft. When you steal from the poor: capitalism.

  • bbbbbbbbbbb@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    3 months ago

    In as barebones as I can make it, SBF disappeared money from the wealthy with no return of investment. Trump held office and was able to deregulate and reduce taxes for the wealthy allowing their wealth to accumulate.

    • LufyCZ@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      Your bones are broken then, because that’s just straight up not how it works.

      Trump was fined because it was a civil trial that he lost. In this instance. His criminal trials are ongoing.

      SBF is getting locked up because it was a criminal trial that he lost.

      • kora@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        The laws that lead to such actions being classified as they are, are a direct result of the the rich imposing their desires on the world. Trump is a vessel for that to happen for most of them, so he is tolerated, more or less.

        The fact that Trump was able to commit the frauds in the first place and only get attention from the law just now is part of the wealthy’s SOP

        • LufyCZ@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          Going by that logic, hasn’t Trump defrauded big banks rich people have huge amounts of assets in?

          • kora@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            3 months ago

            I didn’t say he was an ideal vessel. He’s just managed to somehow be cool(?)er than they are with the population, and they benefit still. I don’t mean like some illuminati type BS, just a matter of happy coincidences, and a few convenient occasional suggestions I’d imagine. Oh, and money.

            Besides, the amount he’s defrauded is essentially chump change once you consider insurance and assets etc.

  • lemmyseizethemeans
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 months ago

    Oh my sweet summer child

    The law does not exist

    There is a genocide in Gaza that the entire world said stop with a 'non binding resolution ’

    The law

    Does not

    Exist. (Unless you’re poor lol)

  • forgotmylastusername@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    3 months ago

    A president in jail would be disastrous for the reputation of America as a country. That’s been my theory as to why he will never face any real consequence. It seems like an elephant in the room. One that probably doesn’t even split neatly down partisanship.

    • Liz@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      In my opinion, not prosecuting a blatant criminal is a much worse look for the country. You can’t undo the past, but you can bring him to justice.

    • asim0v@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Not prosecuting a ex-President for literally trying to both violently and by subterfuge overturn a lawful, democratic election while in office by a position that is literally sworn to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution would officially make America a joke.

      Other democracies can uphold their own laws even when the highest official of the land violates their oath of office. If we do not, the idea of America as a democracy is officially dead.

      • K3zi4@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 months ago

        Sorry, but the fact he was even elected the first time made America a complete joke to the rest of the world. It is utterly bizarre watching this all unfold, and that after everything that’s happened since, Trump still has a good chance of election AGAIN?

        Wtf is going on over there?

  • John_McMurray@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    Bit of a difference between outright theft and a civil dispute over the value of a property put up for a loan,

    • Professorozone@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      Really? Isn’t fraudulently paying less in taxes, stealing from the government? I thought Al Capone went to prison for tax avoidance.

      • John_McMurray@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Tax evasion and a dispute over property valuation are not the same thing either. Tac avoidance is legal, think loopholes, evasion is not, but i think you knew that and intentionally used the wrong term.

        • III@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Pretty sure fluxuating your property valuation depending on your need is actually illegal and not just loopholes. But i think you knew that.

          • John_McMurray@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            Nobody knows that until sometime after the next three-five appeals. Besides, assessed value is for taxes, real value is for loans.

  • PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Well the legal system doesn’t exist on paper. Laws are not what the legal system operates on. Allegedly, breaking a law is what allows, but doesn’t require, the legal system to be involved at all.

    So to answer your question, Sam Bankman is a nobody, that no one likes, and caused a very public number of people to lose a lot of money. His case is a slam-dunk, and has no further implications. Trump is a former president who did exactly the same shit that every other former president has done since Washington. So prosecuting him for his crimes now means that the power brokers of the US empire are now potentially open to prosecution. So of course the two aren’t going to be comparable.

    So there is no “official reason” because officially the judicial system is based on individual discretion.

    • MutilationWave@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      I was with you until

      “Trump is a former president who did exactly the same shit that every other former president has done since Washington.”

      Every president since Washington has misused campaign funds to pay for silence on an affair, stolen top secret documents, conducted business fraudulently, and plotted multiple attempts to subvert an election?

      I must be missing something. If you take that line out I agree with the rest of your comment.

    • Professorozone@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      Your answer doesn’t pass my smell test. Yes they can choose NOT to prosecute because, for instance, presidents are too important, but they DID prosecute and they have to say what law was broken and there are sentencing guidelines. If Trump and Fried were both convicted of murder, I’m pretty sure Trump would not just be fined while Fried was jailed. I don’t pretend that Trump will ever face serious consequences but I kind of think there IS a legal reasoning behind the differences in the two cases.