Sam Bankman-Fried has successfully managed to increase his chances of his a pardon right after his most recent publicity stunt where he managed to miraculously complete a secret interview with right-wing commentator Tucker Carlson from prison.

Despite the tight security system of the Brooklyn's Metropolis Detention Center-where Bankman-Fried had been held for the last 18 months-Bankman-Fried managed to do an interview with commentator Tucker Carlsen where he expressed his disappointment with the Democratic Party and announced his change to alliance to support the Republican party from now on.

Bankman-Fried had always been a well known as a long time supporter of the Democratic Party. There were even many news outlets who have reported that Bankman-Fried had channeled more than $100 million of the money he has laundered from FTX to the Democratic Party as campaign donations.

Bankman-Fried chance of pardon has increased

Many are speculating that this interview with Tucker Carlson is Bankman-Fried's long-shot campaign to receive a Presidential pardon for his 25-year sentence.

After FTX went bankrupt, Bankman-Fried devised a 19-point plan to revive his public image, according to a memo released by federal prosecutors. Number 3 on the list was: "Go on Tucker Carlsen, come out as republican."

Part of this point was also to "come out against the woke agenda," and that exactly what he did. During the interview, Carlson expressed his surprise that Bankman-Fried, formerly the top donor to the Democratic Party, wasn't protected from prison time by his connection, saying

"You gave so much to the Democrats that I kind of thought they would rescue you in the end. Where were all your friends, the Democratic Party..."

To that, Bankman-Fried speculated that the main reason why the Democratic Party didn't extend their help to him might be because of his political shift. Bankman-Fried explained that back in 2020, he identified himself as a center-left and he donated a lot of money to the Democratic party.

During that time, he also made many trips to DC where he said he was shocked by what he saw. By late 2022, he claimed that he was privately giving to the Republicans as much as he was to the Democrats.

In another bow to the Republicans and Trump, Bankman-Fried co-wrote an opinion piece in The Washington Post last month arguing that President Trump's plans for a sovereign wealth fund could help dramatically increase corporate productivity."

He speculates that it could be this shift in political alliance that led the Democratic Party to leave him in a lurch.

Success at a price

But it seems that his strategy of cozying up with the Republican party might be working. According to a March 7 X post from crypto predictions platform Polymarket, "the odds of an SBF pardon has nearly doubled," since the interview was published.

The interview, which was released on Carlson's Youtube channel on March 6, quickly gained traction, amassing over 730,000 views.

But apparently, Bankman-Fried also paid a price for this gamble. Shortly after his interview went viral, it was also reported that he was transferred to solitary confinement for engaging in the interview without the approval from prison authorities.

According to a spokesperson for the Bureau of Prison, inmate communication in federal prisons is heavily regulated, but Bankman-Fried somehow managed to complete the 45 min interview without being caught.

At the same time, Bankman-Fried's parents, Joe Bankman and Barbara Fried, are both fighting to get a pardon for their son. According to media reports, they have already consulted some personnel within the Trump Administration to fight for a possible clemency.

Many have compared Bankman-Fried's case with the case of Ross Ulbricht, the founder of the Silk Road darknet marketplace, who had served 12 years in prison.

Meanwhile, in September 2024, Sam Bankman-Fried’s legal team filed an appeal challenging his seven felony convictions and 25-year prison sentence.

In a 102-page legal brief, his attorneys argued that the former FTX CEO was never presumed innocent, claiming that intense media scrutiny, prosecutorial bias, and judicial treatment unfairly influenced his case.