Elon Musk says he definitely WON’T be voting for these specific candidates



Elon Musk’s recent interview with CNBC’s Andrew Ross Sorkin at the New York TImes' DealBook Summit was full of interesting moments — some more controversial than others, like when Musk told controlling advertisers who sought to blackmail him, “Go f*** yourself.”

Another notable moment was when Sorkin asked Musk who he would vote for in the 2024 election.

Dave Rubin plays the clip of Musk’s answer.

“I would not vote for Biden,” he bluntly stated.

“You’d vote for Trump?” Sorkin asked.

“I’m not saying I would vote for Trump,” Musk corrected.

“Would you vote for Nikki Haley?” the host pressed, reminding Musk that Haley is the one who “wants all social media names to be exposed.”

“No, I think that’s outrageous,” he replied. “I’m not going to vote for some pro-censorship candidate.”

Dave isn’t surprised by these answers.

“You’re not going to tell a guy who bought a giant tech company ... that they can’t have anonymous users,” he says.

Of course, Biden isn’t any better in the censorship department.

Musk also told Sorkin that “the Democrats appear to be more pro-censorship than the Republicans.”

“If we've learned anything,” says Dave, “it's that the left and the wokesters and all of the big tech people — those are the ones ... who are actually coming for your free speech.”


Want more from Dave Rubin?

To enjoy more honest conversations, free speech, and big ideas with Dave Rubin, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

'Look, I've had a bad month': Democrat megadonor Sam Bankman-Fried says he didn't 'try to commit fraud' and isn't losing too much sleep over FTX collapse



Disgraced Democrat megadonor Sam Bankman-Fried, the former FTX CEO who ran his company into the ground and has been accused of substantial wrongdoing, testified on Wednesday night — not before a jury of his peers in court, but in a paid appearance at the New York Times' DealBook Summit.

The event — where Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy shot down a peace proposal, script-reader Ben Affleck humble-bragged about his fame, and Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg defended his company's forays into the so-called metaverse — provided Bankman-Fried with an opportunity to complain about his recent misfortune and to displace blame about the role he played in the scandalous collapse of his crypto exchange, FTX.

What are the details?

Bankman-Fried telecommuted from the Bahamas, where he, his parents, and other FTX executives reportedly own at least $121 million in real estate, to field questions posed by New York Times columnist Andrew Sorkin.

Throughout the interview, SBF alternated between assuming and shunting responsibility for FTX's downfall.

In one instance, SBF indicated that FTX's implosion was resultant of "a massive failure of oversight on my part."

"Whatever happened, why it happened, I had a duty to our stakeholders, our customers, our investors, the regulators of the world, to do right by them," said SBF. "Clearly I didn’t do a good job of that."

Despite this admission, SBF went onto distance himself from his trading firm, Alameda Research, linked to FTX and its demise.

SBF said regarding the relationship between FTX and Alameda Research that he "wasn't running Alameda, I don't know exactly what was going on."

“I didn’t knowingly commingle funds,” SBF added.

Some, including Alex Berenson, find that hard to believe, particularly since SBF owned the lion's share of Alameda.

\u201cYou are crazy.\n\nThe bankruptcy filing shows @sbf owned 90 percent of Alameda. It had lent Sam Bankman-Fried - not a corporate entity he controlled, HIM - $1 billion.\n\nThe idea he is now trying out - that he didn't control it and he didn't know what it was doing - is bizarre.\u201d
— Alex Berenson (@Alex Berenson) 1669902506

Decrypt reported that the blockchain data suggests the funds were commingled. Billions of dollars' worth of customer funds had reportedly been loaned out to Alameda to pay down the firm's trading losses while SBF was running the show.

SBF also claimed that he "didn’t ever try to commit fraud on anyone."

Bloomberg noted that, notwithstanding SBF's claims on Wednesday, there are outstanding questions about how FTX ended up with an $8 billion gap in its balance sheets.

When Sorkin asked about criminal liability, SBF squirmed uncontrollably and said, "There’s a time and a place for me to think about myself and my own future. ... I don't think this is it."

Without admitting to a crime, SBF did however underscore that he "screwed up."

The New York Times suggested that throughout the discussion, SBF sought to characterize the situation as an unintentional mistake, "perhaps hoping to set up lack of intent for (criminal) liability purposes."

Tough luck and good sleep for the 'next Warren Buffett'

In an apparent effort to drum up sympathy, SBF — who managed to lose approximately 94% of his estimated $15.6 billion on Election Day — told Sorkin, "Look, I've had a bad month."

SBF, once touted as the "next Warren Buffett," told Sorkin that he now has "close to nothing" and had been reduced to only having one working credit card.

Despite his bad month, SBF said, "You would’ve thought that I’d be getting no sleep right now, and instead I’m getting some."

An alleged FTX user who likely isn't getting much sleep had his message relayed to SBF by Sorkin.

In an email with "Sam Bankman-Fried stole $2 million from me" in the subject line, the user wrote, "Andrew, can you please ask SBF why he decided to steal my life savings and the $10 billion more from customers to give to his hedge fund, Alameda?"

Noting that several other letters like this had been sent in, Sorkin asked SBF, "What do you tell this man?"

SBF, down to only one credit card, said that he was "deeply sorry about what happened."

The New York Times reported that among the demonstrators gathered outside the event to protest SBF's appearance was a man who identified himself as Anthony Canelo of New York, who claimed to have lost over $10,000 investing in FTX's token, FTT.

While the bankruptcy filing drawn up by FTX indicated that the company has over 100,000 creditors, CNBC reported that there could be more than one million creditors.

Backlash

Although some critical of SBF's appearance appeared to protest outside the venue, many instead took to social media to express their disdain.

American Fox Business Network financial journalist Charles Payne found it troubling that SBF should be applauded in and out of a high-profile paid speaking gig after his company's collapse left creditors facing losses exceeding billions of dollars. Payne tweeted, "The 'elites' protect their own even under a microscope."

\u201cCancel Culture has wiped out a lot of people yet the @WSJ and @nytimes still trying to rehab and protect the imagine of Sam Bankman-Fried. So many young people looking to make their way in life have been wiped out. \n\nThe "elites" protect their own even under a microscope.\u201d
— Charles V Payne (@Charles V Payne) 1669305523

Republican Rep. Lance Gooden (Texas) suggested that the left appears more outraged by Elon Musk spending billions to restore free speech on Twitter than by SBF's erasure of billions.

\u201cElon Musk: Spent $44 billion to bring back free speech\n\nSam Bankman-Fried: Scammed people of billions\n\nGuess which one Democrats are more outraged by?\u201d
— Lance Gooden (@Lance Gooden) 1669173746

Turning Point USA President Charlie Kirk noted that had SBF been "the 2nd biggest donor to conservative candidates in the midterms he would be indicted by now."

\u201cIf Sam Bankman-Fried was the 2nd biggest donor to conservative candidates in the midterms he would be indicted by now.\u201d
— Charlie Kirk (@Charlie Kirk) 1669878771

The whole New York Times interview with the Democrat megadonor can be seen here:

Sam Bankman-Fried Interviewed Live About the Collapse of FTX youtu.be