David Sacks, the tech entrepreneur and newly appointed White House AI and Crypto Czar, recently took to X (formerly Twitter) to blast The New York Times (NYT) for what he calls a "hoax factory" in their reporting on his potential conflicts of interest. In a detailed thread, Sacks outlines how NYT reporters allegedly pursued a biased narrative over five months, ignoring facts and pivoting accusations when debunked.

For those new to the term, the "Crypto Czar" refers to Sacks' role overseeing U.S. policy on artificial intelligence and cryptocurrency. This position is crucial for the blockchain space, including meme tokens, as it could shape regulations that affect everything from token launches to market innovations.

In his post, Sacks explains: "Five months ago, five New York Times reporters were dispatched to create a story about my supposed conflicts of interest working as the White House AI & Crypto Czar." He describes a process where reporters sent "fact checks" revealing accusations, which his team refuted in detail. However, the final article only included selective responses, according to Sacks.

The accusations reportedly included a made-up dinner with a tech CEO, false claims of promising access to the President, and unfounded influences on defense contracts. Sacks claims that every debunked point led to NYT shifting to new allegations, prolonging the story without evidence.

Frustrated by the perceived bias, Sacks hired Clare Locke, a law firm specializing in defamation. He attached their letter to NYT in his tweet, providing context on the interactions. The letter, sent on November 24, 2025, by attorneys Thomas A. Clare and Eric D. Hageman, addresses David McCraw, Senior Vice President & Deputy General Counsel at The New York Times.

Here's a key excerpt from the letter:

"A few months ago, a small army of journalists from The New York Times set out to write a hit piece about White House AI and Crypto Czar David Sacks. Their editor gave them clear marching orders: find and report on a conflict of interest between Mr. Sacks' duties in the White House and his background in the private technology sector. For the last five months, at least five Times reporters have turned over every stone searching for facts to support their narrative that Mr. Sacks has deep conflicts of interest."

The letter defends Sacks' role, noting his expertise from founding Craft Ventures and his positions in government ethics. It argues that NYT misunderstood his advisory position, which doesn't involve leverage over experts from the private sector. Sacks is portrayed as a "remarkably accomplished technology luminary" who accepted the role to promote ethical policies in AI and crypto.

Interestingly, the letter points out Sacks' divestment from investments and his advocacy for pro-innovation policies, countering NYT's narrative. It concludes by warning that if NYT disagrees with his policies, they should debate them openly rather than sullying his reputation without evidence.

This drama unfolds amid growing excitement in the crypto community about potential deregulation under the new administration. For meme token enthusiasts, Sacks' policies could mean fewer barriers to creative projects, boosting the sector's vibrancy. However, allegations like these highlight the scrutiny on key figures bridging tech and government.

Sacks ends his thread by calling the published NYT article a "nothing burger," strung together with anecdotes that don't back the headline. He urges readers to review the Clare Locke letter for full context, emphasizing how NYT allegedly mischaracterized facts.

If you're in the blockchain space, this story underscores the intersection of media, politics, and crypto. Keep an eye on David Sacks' X profile for more updates, and check out related discussions on platforms like CoinDesk for deeper dives into crypto policy.

As meme tokens continue to evolve, understanding these high-level battles can help practitioners navigate the regulatory landscape. What do you think—fair reporting or targeted hit piece? Share your thoughts in the comments below.