Itemoids

Atlantic

The Anarchic Spirit Among House Republicans

The Atlantic

www.theatlantic.com › national › archive › 2023 › 10 › washington-week-republicans-kevin-mccarthy-gop-2024 › 675552

Editor’s Note: Washington Week with The Atlantic is a partnership between NewsHour Productions, WETA, and The Atlantic airing every Friday on PBS stations nationwide. Check your local listings or watch full episodes here.

Representative Kevin McCarthy, a Republican from California, was ousted from his role as speaker of the House this week, and the race for someone to replace him is under way. The anarchic spirit that is alive and well among House Republicans threatens to exacerbate the federal government’s dysfunction and places support for Ukraine in peril as another potential shutdown looms.

What does the GOP’s infighting mean for the health of the party and the country, and for the 2024 presidential campaign?

Joining the editor in chief of The Atlantic and moderator, Jeffrey Goldberg, this week to discuss these issues and more: Nancy Cordes, the chief White House correspondent at CBS News; Eugene Daniels, a White House correspondent at Politico and a co-author of “Playbook”; and Chuck Todd, the chief political analyst at NBC News.

‘The Middle East Region Is Quieter Today Than It Has Been in Two Decades’

The Atlantic

www.theatlantic.com › international › archive › 2023 › 10 › israel-war-middle-east-jake-sullivan › 675580

Updated at 3:12 p.m. ET on October 7, 2023

What a difference a week makes.

Just eight days ago, National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan, speaking at The Atlantic Festival, rattled off a long list of positive developments in the Middle East, developments that were allowing the Biden administration to focus on other regions and other problems. A truce was holding in Yemen. Iranian attacks against U.S. forces had stopped. America’s presence in Iraq was “stable.” The good news crescendoed with this statement: “The Middle East region is quieter today than it has been in two decades.”

One week later, a shocking, multifront attack launched by the Iranian-supported Hamas against Israel has turned the Middle East into a maelstrom. The assault, almost 50 years to the day after the surprise Arab attack on Israel that marked the opening of the Yom Kippur War, could represent a paradigm-shifting moment as big as 9/11. So far, more than 100 Israelis are confirmed dead and many hundreds more gravely injured in a coordinated attack by Hamas terrorists who infiltrated by land, sea, and air. A thousand tragedies will unfold—at the moment, an unknown number of Israeli civilians and soldiers might be held hostage in Gaza. As of this writing, nearly 200 are reported dead in Israeli reprisal raids. The Israeli army has activated at least 100,000 reservists, and a full-scale ground invasion of Gaza is plausible, if not probable.

Behind this moment are failures of intelligence, but also of imagination. The Israeli government, led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has styled himself as “Mr. Security” for decades, will have much to answer for in the coming weeks and months. But Sullivan’s comments, made onstage in Washington to The Atlantic’s editor in chief, Jeffrey Goldberg, also suggest how little sense there was among Biden officials that something like this could happen. “Challenges remain,” Sullivan said in his comments last week. “Iran’s nuclear-weapons program, the tensions between Israelis and Palestinians. But the amount of time I have to spend on crisis and conflict in the Middle East today, compared to any of my predecessors going back to 9/11, is significantly reduced.” (His remarks begin at 58:52 in the video below.)

In the coming days, there is no doubt that Sullivan’s Pollyannaish view will be subjected to great scrutiny. Hamas, and its Iranian and Hezbollah allies, have not made a secret of their ultimate aims. Beyond wishful thinking, the cause of the hopefulness articulated by Sullivan might be this: the developing deal to establish formal relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia—a developing deal that is most likely developing no more.

The Biden administration and Netanyahu have been deeply invested in such an agreement, and the desire for it might have created a blindness among Israelis and Americans alike about what was happening just over the border in Gaza. “We wanted to try and pretend that this conflict was isolated and contained and didn’t need our attention,” Yaakov Katz, the former editor-in-chief of The Jerusalem Post, told me today hours after the invasion.

“There is clearly in his comments a perception that Iranian options for disrupting were limited,” Dennis Ross, a Middle East peace negotiator in several administrations, told me, referring to Sullivan’s earlier assertions. “You don’t make that statement unless you think the Iranian options for disrupting are limited. And obviously at this point that proves not to be correct.”

On Netanyahu’s side, an agreement with the Saudis would help distract from the ongoing domestic unrest in Israel over the judicial overhaul his right-wing coalition has sought and that has led to nearly a year of protests. For Biden, a peace agreement would help bolster his foreign policy record going into the 2024 elections—with the possible effect of erasing memories of the chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan.

Out of these twinned interests emerged the goal of de-escalation and quiet—a noble desire, to be sure. The United States, for its part, is eager to do more than just respond to crises in the region and seems to have been genuinely caught by surprise (“There is never any justification for terrorism,” read a statement from the NSC). But it apparently didn’t take into account Iran’s capabilities for sowing such crises. Behind the Hamas attack can be seen the desperation in Tehran to avoid the chance of a handshake between Netanyahu and Saudi Arabia’s Mohammed bin Salman. (Iran, a longtime backer of Hamas, celebrated today’s attacks.)

“The attack is so extreme and unusual that it is almost impossible to imagine Israel feeling comfortable with a return to the status quo ante in Gaza,” Hussein Ibish, the senior resident scholar at the Arab Gulf States Institute, told me. A change to Israel’s control over Gaza, which Ibish sees as inevitable, will affect the negotiations with Saudi Arabia. The Saudis need a concession from the Israelis in the Palestinian conflict to move forward, which seems hard to fathom now. “The conditions and the terms and the contexts have been thrown into radical uncertainty,” Ibish said.

Ross said he doesn’t think that it’s clear the Hamas invasion will necessarily spell the end of what had been a period of less tension. “A lot depends on how this comes out. If it comes out looking like Hamas succeeded and Iran succeeded, well, then we’re looking at a region that’s going to look quite hopeless for a long time to come. But if this comes out in a way where they expended their best efforts and they ended up being set back—losing—well, then the prospects for the region can look much more hopeful.”

At the moment, it seems Iran is getting its wish, and at the expense of Gaza’s population. Israel is at war, prepared to launch a major campaign against Hamas in retaliation. Further death and destruction will surely follow. And the truism holds: The only constant in the Middle East is precipitous and dramatic change. The “quiet” that Sullivan was observing—if it ever existed as more than just a wish—is already a distant memory.

Soccer Diplomacy Comes to the Middle East

The Atlantic

www.theatlantic.com › international › archive › 2023 › 10 › saudi-arabia-iran-soccer-diplomacy › 675558

On the night of September 1, 2023, a Saudi Pro League soccer game was broadcast directly into Iranian homes. Less than a year ago, such a broadcast would have been unthinkable. Iran and Saudi Arabia were sworn adversaries whose football teams could not even play each other except on neutral turf.

The broadcast didn’t disappoint. Nor was it expected to, as the league, with abundant coffers, now features an ever-expanding roster of players who are among the most celebrated to have ever played the game. When one of those players, the striker Karim Benzema, scored a world-class, side-heel clip of a goal, the Iranian sportscaster, in awe of what he and everyone else had just witnessed, lingered on the player’s full name with near-veneration: Karim Mostafa Benzema.

[Read: The tormented soul of Iranian soccer]

The match ended with seven goals exchanged, at least one of which, by the Serbian player Aleksandar Mitrović, was almost the equal of Benzema’s. And the game itself was an instant classic, the perfect example of why soccer is called “the beautiful game.”

Afterward, on Iranian social media, spectators rhapsodized about what they had just witnessed on state television. “Dear God, I ended up watching this game instead of the Rome vs Milan match,” a fan named Ali wrote. From the Gulf port city of Bushehr, home to the Middle East’s first civilian atomic reactor, someone else wrote: “One of the best clasicos I’ve ever watched in my whole life.”

A soccer match had to promise to be that good for Iranian fans to forgo a simultaneous broadcast of a top Italian professional-league game in its favor. Even more remarkable was the fact that the match was from neither Spain’s LaLiga nor the British Premier League, but rather, between two of Saudi Arabia’s top three teams:

“I never would have believed Saudi football could be so gorgeous.”

“Way to go Arabs!”

“Who would have thought one day we’d sit and watch the Saudi league?”

“Before long we’ll be asking one another if you’re an Al-Ittihad fan, an Al-Hilal fan or an Al-Nassr fan. So long, Europe!”

The decision to air Saudi league soccer on Iranian television, and to invest Iranian fans in its outcome, was not an idle one on the part of the Islamic Republic. Rather, it reflects a changing orientation in Tehran—one that few saw coming in 2016. That year, the ever-deteriorating relationship between the two heavy hitters in the Middle East took an especially sharp turn for the worse, when Saudi Arabia executed several dozen of its Shiite citizens, and demonstrators burned the Saudi embassy in Tehran. The two countries severed all diplomatic ties. Tensions  spilled over into open violence in the years that followed, with Tehran and Riyadh engaged in proxy contests in Yemen, Lebanon, Iraq, and Syria.

[Read: Why Saudi Arabia is so quiet about Iran’s protests]

But Iran has a way of periodically dropping a bombshell on the rest of the world. The Saudi-Iranian rapprochement that China brokered in March 2023 was one such bombshell. And now Tehran is quietly following through with a dedicated rehabilitation of Saudi Arabia in numerous aspects of Iranian public life.

Take television: A popular Iranian spy series called Safe House first aired in 2020 and included an episode in which an agent of the Islamic Republic interviews a captured enemy spy, and one where he gleans valuable information from a source in Baghdad. The focus in both scenes is a certain Saudi notable who, in real life and over a very long, very distinguished, and very anti-Iranian career has occupied powerful positions in intelligence and diplomacy. After the rapprochement, the series was edited and reissued, with the focus on the nonfictional dark eminence deleted. Now neither the Saudi notable nor his supposed inimical machinations exist in the universe of the show. Notably, government-backed media outlets such as KhabarOnline and Etemad ran reports on the series’ sudden turnabout.

At the same time, ultraconservative government newspapers such as Kayhan and Vatan-e ٍEmrooz, which were until a year ago die-hard foes of the Saudis, have completely changed their tune. A promised exchange of ambassadors has already taken place, and in a recent visit to Riyadh, after nearly a decade’s hiatus in visits, Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian went so far as to emphasize Iran’s support of the Saudi bid to host a world’s fair in 2030. For its part, Arab News, the most important English-language Saudi paper, dedicated its front page to celebrating the Persian New Year in March. The seven Arab states that edge the Gulf (Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, Oman, and Iraq) prepared for a comprehensive sit-down with their Persian neighbor on September 23 in New York. That meeting fell through because of scheduling conflicts and a continuing maritime-border dispute between Iraq and Kuwait, but lower-level talks are rumored to be scheduled for the near future.

The immediate dividend for Iran is desperately needed hard currency. The rift between the two countries had cost Iran: Before 2016, Shiite Arab pilgrims from Saudi Arabia and Bahrain were a solid source of tourism in the Iranian holy city of Mashhad, such that, according to Mohammad Ghanei, the chair of the city’s hotelier association, merchants from these countries booked up to 10 four- and five-star hotels in the city year-round. The termination of diplomatic relations between Iran and Saudi meant that few, if any, Gulf Arab tourists, and certainly none from Saudi Arabia, would be traveling for pilgrimage or to visit Iran’s northern Caspian Sea region, another favorite destination.

[Read: China plays peacemaker]

The dialogue that broke out between these two adversaries in 2023 was a remarkable thing. Perhaps the parties were simply exhausted, like soccer players who had run around a pitch for 90 minutes and fought to a draw, only to have to play an extra 30 minutes and ultimately go for penalty kicks. Or maybe priorities changed. The United States had pulled out of Afghanistan and begun a not-so-delicate retreat from the Middle East; war had come to Ukraine; and the U.S. and China seemed ever less inclined to pretend that their brawl for global supremacy was just about economics.

Change had come, in other words; yet Iran and Saudi Arabia found themselves facing the same Gulf, alone, and with the same neighbors or near neighbors. Neither was going anywhere. In an interview in The Atlantic a year before the Iran-Saudi agreement, Mohammed bin Salman had this to say: “Where is the potential in the world today? It’s in Saudi Arabia. And if you want to miss it, I believe other people in the East are going to be super happy.”

[From the April 2022 issue: Absolute power]

The Islamic Republic of Iran, for one, is super happy. So are Iranian soccer fans, who anticipate regularly seeing some of the legends of the game—Benzema, Cristiano Ronaldo, Neymar, Sadio Mané, and likely eventually Mohamed Salah—come play on Iranian soil during Asia’s AFC Champions League matches. Such is the gift that Saudi Arabia has brought to Iranian fans, a sizable number of whom booed their own national team during the fall 2022 World Cup, after Mahsa Amini’s death touched off a wave of domestic protests. Both Iran and Arabia are civilizations of long standing that have seen their share of human inconstancy—enough, perhaps, to be inured to the fluidity of history, let alone of geopolitical alignments. On the streets of Iranian cities, you’ll still find pictures of Iranian “martyrs” of the Bosnian War. Yet, three decades later, fans eagerly await the arrival of a Serbian national, Mitrović, who happens to play for a club from the heart of the Islamic world, Saudi Arabia.

During the Women’s World Cup in Australia this summer, the head of Iran’s soccer federation and his Saudi counterpart met and agreed that at last the two countries’ teams could play on each other’s territory. Iran and Saudi Arabia, alongside South Korea, Japan, and Australia, are traditional powerhouses of Asian soccer; the two countries’ teams will inevitably meet again and again. Now they’ll do so on home turf, and their fans will see each other inside their home stadiums and on TV—they will see each other being human, and just as smitten with football as their rivals across a body of water whose very name remains in dispute between Arabs and Persians.

Just last week, the Saudi team, Al-Ittihad, withdrew from a match in the Iranian city of Isfahan, reportedly in protest of having to pass by a statue of the slain Quds Force leader Haj Qasem Soleimani on the way to the pitch. Iran's foreign minister spoke with his Saudi counterpart, and the match will likely be rescheduled—a testament to just how far the two countries are willing to go to make things work.

Soccer diplomacy has moved from the living rooms of Iranians into stores and malls. In the sports shops of the Moniriyeh district of Tehran, a perennial hot item is a kids’ Ronaldo jersey, which starts at $4, depending on the quality, and is completely bootleg, like nearly all sports clothing sold in the city. The Portuguese superstar’s colors are not the white of his storied former club Real Madrid, nor the red of another giant, Manchester United, but rather the yellow and blue of Al-Nassr Football Club, from Riyadh. Al-Nassr and Ronaldo played their first game on Iranian soil on September 19 against another of Asia’s most decorated teams: the Iranian team Persepolis, whose name translates to “the city of Persians.”

So long, Europe.

Supermarkets Are More Than Stores

The Atlantic

www.theatlantic.com › newsletters › archive › 2023 › 10 › supermarket-wonder-everyday › 675567

This is an edition of The Atlantic Daily, a newsletter that guides you through the biggest stories of the day, helps you discover new ideas, and recommends the best in culture. Sign up for it here.

“I don’t remember my first visit to Central Park or the Metropolitan Museum of Art, but I do remember my first trip to Fairway,” Bianca Bosker wrote in 2020 of the grocery store in New York City.

She continued:

My grandmother, who had been forced to flee her home in what was then Yugoslavia during World War II, had spent nearly two decades as a stateless person … Fairway, to her, was a place of surreal abundance. She could roll her black-metal grocery cart down the hill and roll it back up stuffed with old- and new-country fare: an Entenmann’s Danish ring, Kraš Napolitanke, Thomas’ English Muffins, Hungarian salami, panettone, hot dogs, ajvar, cornflakes. And the deals! She’d sit me down at the kitchen table and, beaming, haul out new brands of wafer cookies to marvel at how little she’d paid.

Bosker’s description of the supermarket “pilgrimage” she made with her family growing up has stuck with me. It’s a reminder of the expansive power of “mundane” activities, especially for people who appreciate them deeply. Supermarkets are full of everyday wonders, such as the steady availability of fresh produce—or a fantastic discount. They’re an opportunity for children to explore and learn about food (and about how not to crash into people in their kid-size carts). But they’re not free of issues of class inequality and consumer choice. Today’s newsletter is dedicated to the space of the supermarket, and how people behave within it.

On Grocery Stores

The Paradox at the Grocery Store

By Adam Fleming Petty

What people really need is less choice, not more.

The Indignity of Grocery Shopping

By J. Howard Rosier

Annie Ernaux examines the malaise of the modern supermarket.

The Pandemic Shows Us the Genius of Supermarkets

By Bianca Bosker

A short history of the stores that—even now—keep us supplied with an abundance of choices (From 2020)

Still Curious?

Of course instant groceries don’t work: Obstacles include: space, time, reality. Grocery stores are a miracle: In a 2017 book, the author Michael Ruhlman pondered the “extraordinary bounty” that’s available at relatively low prices, seven days a week.

Other Diversions

A robot’s nightmare is a burrito full of guac. Comedians only care about comedy. The red pill of humility

P.S.

One thing you won’t find at the grocery store, miraculous as it may be? The most American fruit.

— Isabel

The Taming of Sam Bankman-Fried

The Atlantic

www.theatlantic.com › newsletters › archive › 2023 › 10 › the-taming-of-sam-bankman-fried › 675573

This is an edition of The Atlantic Daily, a newsletter that guides you through the biggest stories of the day, helps you discover new ideas, and recommends the best in culture. Sign up for it here.

Sam Bankman-Fried’s image as a man indifferent to authority helped him ascend. Now, on trial for fraud, the onetime enfant terrible of finance is colliding with an arena of American life where decorum counts.

First, here are three new stories from The Atlantic:

Trump reportedly divulges nuclear secrets. Comedians only care about comedy. The standard advice for concussions is wrong.

The Rules Apply

Sam Bankman-Fried’s parents looked on, stony-faced, as a former employee and friend of their son testified against him in federal court on Wednesday. Asked to identify the defendant, the witness described Bankman-Fried as the man wearing a suit and a purple tie. A year ago, Bankman-Fried was the golden boy of the tech world; observers had no indication that he would wind up in court facing federal fraud charges. That he would appear in a suit and tie, having traded his shaggy curls for close-cropped hair, seemed likewise improbable. The onetime maverick of Silicon Valley looked, from where I was sitting a few rows back in the courtroom, like any other defendant.

The rules, for a time, didn’t apply to Sam Bankman-Fried. Throughout his rise as a crypto leader, Bankman-Fried eschewed formality, consciously cultivating a messy, zany persona. He met with dignitaries in cargo shorts. His hair, constantly unkempt, became a sort of synecdoche for his unbothered attitude (when FTX was gaining renown, he reportedly told a colleague that it was important that his hair stay long so that he would look “crazy”). Now he is confronting a corner of American life reliant on decorum and fact. After FTX’s implosion last year, Bankman-Fried faces seven charges of financial crimes including wire fraud (he has pleaded not guilty to all charges). If convicted, he could face decades in prison. The law, though often unevenly enforced, can at its best serve as an equalizer, where even the powerful must face consequences if they cross lines.

In court this week, Judge Lewis A. Kaplan, a federal-court stalwart who presided over E. Jean Carroll’s case against Donald Trump and other high-profile trials, seemed to epitomize the dignified institution Bankman-Fried is facing. Kaplan did not seem inclined to throw his weight around on behalf of the defendant. On Wednesday afternoon, after the jury filed out, Mark Cohen, one of Bankman-Fried’s defense lawyers, beseeched the judge to help get his client his full prescribed dosage of Adderall. “My problem, of course, is that the last I know, I don’t have a medical license,” the judge snipped, advising that the lawyers contact the Bureau of Prisons about the matter. Bankman-Fried has exasperated this judge in the past: In August, Kaplan ordered the defendant to jail after various infractions (among other things, Bankman-Fried leaked the diary entries of his ex-girlfriend, former Alameda Research CEO Caroline Ellison, to The New York Times).

Bankman-Fried ascended in part based on the idea that he was different from everyone else—smarter, more trustworthy, uniquely able to make sense of the byzantine complexities of cryptocurrency markets. His pedigreed past—he’s an MIT graduate with Stanford Law–professor parents—added to his persona as a disruptive whiz kid. Now the crux of the government’s case against him is that he isn’t so different after all: Bankman-Fried, prosecutors charge, committed good old-fashioned theft.

Using frank language stripped of euphemism, a prosecutor explained to the jury on Wednesday the state’s case of how Bankman-Fried committed fraud on a mass scale. In his opening statement, the government lawyer used, by my count, a version of the word lied 26 times, stole 12 times, took 23 times, and fraud 13 times. Bankman-Fried, the lawyer explained to jurors, stole billions of dollars of customer deposits in order to furnish a lavish lifestyle, make political and charitable donations, and facilitate the purchase of luxury real estate, such as a penthouse in the Bahamas. (A spokesperson for Bankman-Fried did not immediately respond to a request for comment.) That the case revolves around such a complex financial mechanism as crypto is almost incidental; to the prosecution, this was simple fraud, fueled by deception.

Then, in language peppered with metaphors and strained wordplay, Cohen argued in his opening statement that his client acted in good faith trying to run FTX. “There was no theft,” Cohen insisted. Running a start-up, Cohen said, relying on a well-worn tech truism, is like flying a plane as you’re building it. That metaphor was key to the defense’s attempt to explain why Bankman-Fried and his team made such stunning management errors as failing to hire a chief risk officer.

The plane metaphor, which Cohen later repeated, was a bit forced, but it helped to conveniently elide Bankman-Fried’s potential responsibility. The plane was flying into storms while it was being built, his lawyer said; in other words, these were circumstances beyond the defendant’s control. Most of all, Bankman-Fried didn’t intend to steal, Cohen argued. “The defense’s opening statement focused a lot on SBF’s fundamentally good motives and character—as an innovator who made a mistake because the industry and culture are about moving fast and breaking things,” Yesha Yadav, an expert on financial regulation at Vanderbilt Law School, told me over email.

In their opening statements, neither side waded into the complexity of how crypto markets work. The world of crypto is confusing, and, indeed, Bankman-Fried benefited from the perception that he was uniquely qualified to crack it. When it served him, Bankman-Fried relied on his image as a generational genius, a visionary leader who could remake the world of finance. Now his defense is presenting a different narrative: Bankman-Fried might have been “a math nerd,” but he’s also just an overextended businessman who lost track of things as his company ballooned.

Over the next several weeks, the government will need to convince all 12 members of the jury that beyond a reasonable doubt, Bankman-Fried committed fraud. Whether Bankman-Fried will take the stand in his own defense is a big, open question here. In the past, Bankman-Fried has been his own most visible advocate. But in court, where gravity and propriety reign, how his renegade attitude will play—even with his new look—is a wild card.

Related:

Sam Bankman-Fried pushed one boundary too many. The cults of Sam Bankman-Fried

Today’s News

The Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to Narges Mohammadi, an Iranian activist who is currently jailed in Tehran. Republican candidates for House speaker have pulled out from a planned forum on Fox News after calls to keep discussions internal. A glacial lake burst through a major hydroelectric dam in northeast India, killing at least 42 people.

Dispatches

The Books Briefing: Gal Beckerman discusses a new translation of The Iliad, an epic poem that his 10-year-old daughter adores. Up for Debate: Conor Friedersdorf asks readers what America will be like in 2050, and delves into “solarpunk.”

Explore all of our newsletters here.

Evening Read

Pierre Buttinon

What the Longest Study on Human Happiness Found Is the Key to a Good Life

By Robert Waldinger and Marc Schulz

Turn your mind for a moment to a friend or family member you cherish but don’t spend as much time with as you would like. This needn’t be your most significant relationship, just someone who makes you feel energized when you’re with them, and whom you’d like to see more regularly.

How often do you see that person? Every day? Once a month? Once a year? Do the math and project how many hours annually you spend with them. Write this number down and hang on to it …

Thinking about these numbers can help us put our own relationships in perspective. Try figuring out how much time you spend with a good friend or family member. We don’t have to spend every hour with our friends, and some relationships work because they’re exercised sparingly. But nearly all of us have people in our lives whom we’d like to see more.

Read the full article.

More From The Atlantic

The Nobel winner whose writing speaks to everyone A robot’s nightmare is a burrito full of guac. Photos of the week: masked witness, right whale, stormy gorge

Culture Break

Universal

Read. Bottoms Up and the Devil Laughs, by Kerry Howley, is about the “deep state,” but it is so well written that our staff writer Olga Khazan would have read it even if it had been about anything else.

Watch. The Exorcist, William Friedkin’s 1973 film (streaming on Max), is one of the biggest movies ever made. Why are all of the attempts to sequelize it so baffling?

Play our daily crossword.

P.S.

FTX was, in some ways, an intensely personal affair: Bankman-Fried lived with several fellow executives, including his sometimes-girlfriend Ellison. His parents, with whom he lived while on house arrest, had ties to the business, and his brother’s pandemic-prevention nonprofit was the recipient of massive donations. As one of its exhibits on Wednesday, the prosecution showed the jury the now-infamous FTX 2022 Super Bowl ad starring Larry David. Apparently, Joseph Bankman, the father of the defendant, appears in the ad as a signer of the Declaration of Independence, shouting “yes!” after David asks whether “even the stupid ones” should be allowed to vote. After the video played in court, the government lawyer asked a witness to explain who Larry David was. At that point, Joseph Bankman cracked a brief smile, and then his face fell again.

— Lora

Katherine Hu contributed to this newsletter.

When you buy a book using a link in this newsletter, we receive a commission. Thank you for supporting The Atlantic.