CZ’s Lawyer Denies Claims That Binance Co-Founder’s Pardon Was a ‘Pay-to-Play’ Deal
Teresa excellenty Guillén, Changpeng Zhao’s personal lawyer, spoke out against charges that CZ’s pardon by U.S. President Donald Trump in October was the result of inappropriate influence or financial favors. On Anthony Pompliano’s “,” Guillén called the criticism of her client “a pile up of a lot of false statements.”
Guillén specifically criticized the narrative that tied Zhao’s pardon to his claimed involvement with Trump’s enterprises or crypto endeavors, stating: “The media continues to refer to World Liberty as Trump’s company, and I haven’t viewn anything to show me that that’s true.”
She said that the claims reveal a lack of understanding and said, “People are making these assumptions that just show a fundamental misunderstanding of how either business works or how blockchain works.”
Criticism of Politics and the Law
The argument got worse when Democratic Senator called Zhao’s pardon “corruption,” saying that Zhao had purportedly backed Trump’s crypto-related policies and lobbied for mercy. Warren also stated that Zhao was involved in more crimes than initially charged with.
Guillén denied these claims and pointed out that Warren’s public statements were not consistent. She told the senator that he was wrong to say that had been convicted of a crime “he wasn’t convicted of,” and she pushed back against claims that the pardon itself made him more likely to commit a crime.
Guillén also discussed how political figures who make such accusations often receive impunity. She said, “The immunity that these people get is not what our founding fathers wanted.”
The Defense’s Point of View on Justice and Fairness
Guillén states that Zhao’s trial and imprisonment in 2024 were not fair, and that his client was made a scapegoat due to the increased regulatory scrutiny following the FTX crash.
Zhao spent four months in prison and then stepped down as head of later than the company was accused of not having reasonable enough anti-money laundering procedures.
Guillén felt that the legal actions against Zhao were disproportionate, especially when compared to the treatment of traditional banking executives accused of comparable compliance violations.
She stressed that Zhao was the only one who had to go to jail and face charges “with the characteristics of like no fraud and no victims, no criminal history or anything like that.”
Broader Implications for Crypto Regulation
Guillén’s views illustrate the ongoing tension between the crypto industry and policymakers. She views the prosecution against as part of a larger “war on crypto.” She indicated authorities targeted Binance and its founder as symbols in a broader regulatory crackdown, which she feels ultimately resulted in an unjust decision for her client.
Ultimately, Zhao’s lawyers stated that the pardon, which Guillén referred to as “justice,” was not a political favor or a deal. Instead, they claim that the action rectified what they believe was an unfair prosecution based on a general dislike of cryptocurrencies rather than genuine legal grounds.
