David Sachs’ role as President Donald Trump’s artificial intelligence and cryptoczar could work out very well for his investments, as well as his friends, according to a new New York Times report.
However, Saks retorted in a post on Xin which he described a five-month reporting process during which the allegations were “debunked in detail.”
“Today they apparently just threw up their hands and posted this nothing burger,” Sachs said. “Anyone who reads the story carefully can see that he made up a bunch of jokes that don’t support the title.”
It’s not the first time critics have argued that there may be conflicts of interest between Sacks’ political role and his investments. For example, Senator Elizabeth Warren – Democrat from Massachusetts – he said earlier this year that Sacks “simultaneously leads a company that invests in crypto while guiding the nation’s crypto policy,” a “clear conflict of interest” that would “normally” be prohibited under federal law.
However, the NYT story (titled “Silicon Valley man in White House benefits himself and his friends” and credited to five coordinated reporters) appears to offer a more comprehensive view, with an analysis of his financial disclosures suggesting that among Sacks’ 708 tech investments, 449 benefit AI companies.
Sachs has received two White House ethics waivers, stating that he would sell most of his crypto and artificial intelligence assets. However, the NYT reported that his public ethics records do not reveal the residual value of his investments in crypto and artificial intelligence, nor do they indicate when he sold the assets he divested.
Kathleen Clark, a University of Washington law professor specializing in government ethics, made similar comments in July after weighing in on Sacks’ crypto waiver, telling TechCrunch, “That’s bribery.”
Techcrunch event
San Francisco
|
13-15 October 2026
The NYT also reported that Sacks’ filings classify hundreds of investments as hardware or software, rather than AI, and the companies present themselves as AI businesses in their marketing.
To illustrate Sacks’ “intertwining interests,” the NYT pointed to the White House briefing in July where Trump unveiled his AI roadmap — White House chief of staff Susie Wiles reportedly intervened to prevent the All-In podcast (which Sacks co-hosts) from being its sole host event. And All-In asked potential sponsors to pay $1 million for access to a private reception and other events, the NYT claimed.
The NYT also reported that Sacks became close with Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang this spring and played a role in lifting restrictions on Nvidia chip sales around the world, including in China.
Right-wing media personality and former Trump adviser Steve Bannon (who is he did not hide about his animosity toward some of Trump’s Silicon Valley allies) said Sachs is emblematic of an administration where “the tech bros are out of control.”
Sacks spokeswoman Jessica Hoffman told the NYT that “this conflict of interest narrative is false.” Hoffman said Sachs complied with rules on special government employees, that the Office of Government Ethics determined which investments he had to sell and that his role in government cost him more than he benefited.
White House spokeswoman Liz Houston said Sachs had been “an invaluable asset to President Trump’s agenda to consolidate American technological dominance.”
Sacks’ post responding to the NYT includes a letter written to the newspaper by Clare Locke, a law firm hired by Sacks, claiming that reporters had been given “clear marching orders: find and report a conflict of interest between Mr. Sacks’ duties at the White House and his past in the private technology sector.”
The letter also addresses some of the specifics of the NYT story, including the All-In podcast’s role in the White House AI event. Sacks’ lawyers said the AI summit was a non-profit event and that the All-In podcast “lost money hosting the event.”
“Two sponsors were recruited to help partially cover the cost of the event, for which they only received logo placements,” the letter said. “President Trump was never offered access and there was never a VIP reception.”
