Already started: https://www.texastribune.org/2022/11/29/beto-orourke-sam-ban... . Though I somehow doubt everyone will follow suit.

Does this really count though? They said returned it because they weren't expecting it, long before any of the shady news about the company came out.

I can respect that move in general, but it's hard to see it as a response to the scandal.

I'm waiting for Sequoia to be put in jail.

I'd be interested in the theory. Their investors aren't exactly mom and pop operations. But I do agree that their promotion of SBF was asinine though that's all clear to the world now. And I'm not in favor of criminalizing bad investments. Sets bad precedent and incentives.

It will be a long wait, unfortunately. More likely: Sequoia will be shouting from the rooftops that they too are victims.

They... literally... are? The SEC has charged SBF over exactly that.

IANAL but that depends on what their agreements with LPs were, doesn’t it? The managing partners have a fiduciary duty to the fund so couldn’t they be held criminally liable if they failed to do some due diligence stipulated by an LP?

Normally these things are all agreed at the time of the original commitment and the closing of the fund, so assuming there are LPs each and every one of them should have a copy of the obligations of these funds.

There is a campaign finance charge.

The bankruptcy guy has to trace the money flows to political campaigns. Judging from his House testimony, this will take several months.

I suspect the pressure will be immense to return funds once the donations are officially declared dirty during the bankruptcy proceeding.

Also, if in fact SBF donated to both sides, then it will be quite simple for politicians to refund the money.

The big issue is that money has already been spent