David Sacks Claps Back: Denies Conflict Claims Over AI and Crypto White House Role

Another day, another political dust-up in the digital asset arena. This time, the spotlight's on a potential power player navigating the murky waters between Silicon Valley innovation and Washington policy.

The Allegation: A Seat at the Table

Whispers in the beltway suggest a prominent tech figure—with deep roots in both artificial intelligence and cryptocurrency ventures—is being vetted for a significant White House advisory role. The immediate question from critics: can someone with skin in the game truly offer impartial guidance on regulating the very industries that built their fortune?

The Rebuttal: Full Denial

Enter David Sacks. The Craft Ventures co-founder and outspoken tech commentator has publicly shut down claims of any conflict, framing the narrative as premature and speculative. His stance? Experience on the front lines of technological disruption is precisely what policymakers need—not a liability.

The Bigger Picture: Innovation vs. Regulation

This isn't just about one person's career move. It's a proxy battle for the soul of America's tech policy. On one side: the 'move fast and break things' brigade, arguing that aggressive regulation will stifle the next generation of US-led innovation. On the other: regulators and skeptics who've seen this movie before, complete with boom, bust, and a trail of retail investors left holding the bag—a classic tale as old as, well, finance itself.

The administration's final call will send a clear signal. Embrace the disruptors for their expertise, or keep them at arm's length to avoid even the appearance of impropriety. Either way, the intersection of AI, crypto, and power is officially open for business—conflicts and all.

TLDR

• David Sacks said he divested key holdings before joining the administration in January.

• Sacks shared a legal letter stating he received two separate ethics clearances.

• The NYT article alleged Sacks advanced policies that helped tech associates.

• Sacks said five NYT reporters spent five months on the investigation.

David Sacks, who serves as the White House AI and crypto czar, rejected a New York Times article published November 30 that alleged conflicts of interest related to his government duties. In a public response, Sacks claimed the story was based on disproven allegations and said he met all ethics requirements when joining the administration.

Sacks posted a statement to X on Sunday, arguing that the Times reporters sought to build a narrative despite a lack of evidence. He added that five journalists spent several months examining his activities and investments, but failed to prove wrongdoing.

“Anyone who reads the story carefully can see that they strung together a bunch of anecdotes that don’t support the headline,” Sacks wrote.

David Sacks Legal Team Defends Ethics Clearance

Sacks said he hired the defamation law firm Clare Locke during the reporting process. The firm sent a detailed letter to the New York Times that challenged the article’s content and conclusions.

The letter stated that Sacks filed all required financial disclosures and received two ethics letters—one for AI and another for cryptocurrency—from the U.S. Office of Government Ethics. It argued that neither the agency nor other officials raised any ethics concerns during his time in the administration.

Sacks’ legal team also disputed the idea that he failed to disclose remaining investments. They said he followed all required divestment procedures before assuming his role and that his portfolio was reviewed.

The letter said, “Mr. Sacks complied with all steps the [U.S. Office of Government Ethics] found necessary to address any potential conflicts.”

Disputed Allegations on Policy and Access

The New York Times article titled “Silicon Valley’s Man in the WHITE House Is Benefiting Himself and His Friends” accused Sacks of using his position to promote policies that may favor his past tech investments. These included easing export restrictions on chips and promoting the GENIUS Act, which could benefit a portfolio company.

Other claims in the article included his role in a chip-related deal with the United Arab Emirates and how his White House role increased visibility for his “All-In” podcast.

Sacks denied all of these allegations. He said that one of the article’s claims was based on a fabricated dinner with a tech executive. He also stated that the Times adjusted its narrative repeatedly when prior accusations were disproven.

“Every time we WOULD prove an accusation false, NYT pivoted to the next allegation,” he said.

David Sacks Statement Urges Full Transparency

In his post, Sacks also made public the letter from Clare Locke. He said the document would give readers full context on his exchanges with reporters. The letter accused the Times of presenting a selective and misleading version of events.

It further rejected any suggestion that Sacks influenced government procurement or promoted companies in which he had financial interests. The letter said such claims were unsupported and, in some cases, “completely made up.”

Sacks concluded his statement by saying the article was the product of a failed effort to uncover wrongdoing where none existed