Accusations Against Elizabeth Warren
Lawyer John Deaton has accused U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren of violating her oath as a member of the Senate Banking Committee. According to Deaton, Warren allegedly conspired with SEC Chair Gary Gensler by providing him with pre-arranged questions and suggested answers for a Senate hearing.
Deaton’s Allegations Backed by Evidence
Deaton’s claim is in response to a video clip that suggests Warren coached Gensler for a 2021 Senate hearing. Emails obtained from Warren’s office showed that her economic advisor sent Gensler a list of questions and suggested answers. During the hearing, Warren asked questions that closely mirrored the email.
Accusations of Fraudulent Testimony
Deaton argued that Warren’s actions constitute fraudulent testimony before Congress instead of providing actual oversight. He emphasized that Warren, as a senator sitting on the Banking Committee, should have asked the SEC and Gensler about certain matters, such as Sam Bankman-Fried’s meetings with the SEC, but she has not done so.
Double Standard and Possible Conflicts of Interest
Deaton also raised concerns about Gensler’s meetings with certain individuals and companies in the crypto space, including SBF, FTX, Celsius Network, and Luna/UST. He criticized Warren for not asking about these meetings and questioned whether her ties to SBF’s parents could be influencing her actions.
Hot Take: Warren’s Alleged Violation of Responsibility
Lawyer John Deaton accuses U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren of violating her role and responsibility as a member of the Senate Banking Committee. According to Deaton, Warren’s collaboration with SEC Chair Gary Gensler in providing pre-arranged questions and answers for a Senate hearing is not a proper form of oversight, but rather fraudulent behavior. Additionally, Deaton questions Warren’s failure to address significant issues within the crypto industry, specifically concerning certain meetings and possible conflicts of interest. These allegations highlight the need for accountability and impartiality within regulatory bodies overseeing cryptocurrencies and raise concerns about the actions and motivations of public figures in relation to the crypto space.
By
By
By
By