In a letter obtained by D.C. outlet Punchbowl News, the attorney for U.S. Senator and top Senate Banking Committee Democrat Elizabeth Warren refuted claims that she disparaged Binance co-founder Changpeng “CZ” Zhao in remarks made soon after President Trump pardoned the cryptocurrency exchange co-founder, claiming the statement was “true in all respects”.
Binance CZ’s defamation threat
Ben Stafford, Warren’s attorney, responds in the letter to Teresa Goody Guillén, CZ’s attorney, threatening to file a defamation action last week over remarks Warren made following CZ’s pardon, namely her claim in an X post that he “pleaded guilty to a criminal money laundering charge.”
“Senator Warren accurately represented publicly available and widely reported facts,” Stafford’s letter states, adding later, “Mr. Zhao pled guilty to a criminal charge, presented through an information by the Department of Justice, and resulting in a prison sentence.”
Also Read: Binance Co-Founder CZ Refuses To Accept Statue Made For Him As It Is Associated With A Memecoin
In an X post that quoted Warren, CZ disputed his wording, stating, “There were NO money laundering charges [sic]”. Goody Guillén earlier informed the New York Post that if the Senator refused to recant her comments, the former CEO of Binance would immediately pursue a defamation case against her.
CZ’s Lawyer’s comments
“Mr. Zhao will not remain silent while a United States Senator seemingly misuses the office to repeatedly publish defamatory statements that impugn his reputation and cause him further injury,” Goody Guillén said in the letter.
In her letter, Goody Guillén claimed that CZ “pleaded guilty to a single regulatory count—failure to implement an effective anti-money laundering program under the Bank Secrecy Act,” disputing the idea that this constituted a “criminal money laundering charge,” in Warren’s words.
But according to Stafford’s letter, CZ “did plead guilty to a criminal violation of the Bank Secrecy Act – described by its enforcing agency as ‘our nation’s first and most comprehensive anti-money laundering statute'” and “regulatory penalties’ do not exist.”
“Even presuming that absolute immunity would not bar such a defamation claim, Mr. Zhao would need to establish the necessary elements. A public figure such as Mr. Zhao cannot prevail on a defamation claim without presenting evidence that the defendant published a false statement of fact with actual malice,” Stafford’s letter states.
With both sides refusing to stop or step back, things are heating up and the community awaits to see the fate.