Sachs himself led the charge of trying to undermine the Times’s reporting, highlighting how the venture capitalist gave tech executives unprecedented access to the White House and tried to profit from his relationship with the administration, which he called “cheating.” He posted a letter sent to the Times by his lawyer in response to questions sent to Sachs while reporting the story, and complained of the newspaper engaged in “constant goalpost-shifting” to prove that there are financial conflicts in his role in the administration. Sachs suggests that asking about things and then not publishing details about them when those details were refuted is evidence that the Times had an agenda, and not just how journalism works.
david sax @davidsacks It is a reminder of an era of American greatness in which the most capable citizens of the private sector selflessly volunteered for government service for a dollar a day in moments of crisis. He is a credit to our nation and we need more people like him, not less.
– Marc Andreessen 🇺🇸 (@pmarca) 30 November 2025
And then came the rest of the Silicon Valley Superfriends, as someone invaded the group chat and said their guy needed some help. Marc Benioff, CEO of Salesforce and owner of Time Magazine, claimed that the Times report “is not journalism – it’s almost strategic sabotage.” (Side note: Very AI-generated vibes on that post.)
Benioff also said, “America wins the century by raising up builders, not by tearing them down,” which became a bit of a bummer for Sachs defenders. Others took the view that if Sachs wins, we all win, such as the head of Andreessen Horowitz, Marc Andreessen. He said Sachs was “a replica of the era of American greatness in which the most capable citizens of the private sector selflessly volunteered for government service.” Gavin Backer, partner at investment firm Atreides Management, argued, “It’s good for the US to be the leader in AI. And there’s no way for the US to lead in AI without American investors doing well in AI.”
David Sachs really understands AI and cares about America leading in innovation. I’m grateful we have him. https://t.co/6I0PCjtmjH
– Sam Altman (@sama) 1 December 2025
This probably sounds like a good argument to the ears of people who have made big bets on the same sectors that Sachs has bet on, but the defense doesn’t really address the central premise of the Times, which is that Sachs is still invested in the sectors where it is setting policy. The implicit answer is basically, “So what?”
Of course, Sachs’s all-in “besties” had some influences as well. Chamath Palihapitiya, of failed SPAC fame, called the Times “the private equity wife of newspapers,” whatever that means. Jason Calacanis, a human suckerfish, wondered “What would happen if we all bought shares [of] Nighttimes We could and got on board. Very funny tweet from the best friend who has the lowest net worth. Jason Who are “we”? You’re extorting two billion dollars from your friends?
Sachs’s article reflects the exact problem the NYTimes has. Voters specifically want this type of person, not some bureaucrat who has never held a real job (Lena Khan, K Street, Beltway type) https://t.co/ZDi0SsCPa8
– Martin Shkreli (@MartinShkreli) 30 November 2025
Calacanis also feuded with Axios reporter Dan Primack for reasons that are unclear, given that Primack has spent the last day downplaying the Times’ report as a “nothingburger.” Primack said in its newsletter that the report highlighted “what most of us already knew, although ‘we’ are not the NYT’s target audience” – which is actually not a criticism of the reporting at all. Primack argues that Sachs’s position is fundamentally consistent with his beliefs and that “it is almost impossible to be an active venture capitalist and not make investments that will be affected by AI policy.” Which is fair enough, but there’s no rule that we have to appoint a venture capitalist in this role. He can’t be an AI and crypto emperor!
One thing that seems to be missing from the ongoing back-and-forth is that Sachs is a totem for the division happening in MAGA right now. Sachs stands out as a pro-corporate, self-dealing rich man, the type of person who financed Trump’s second term in the White House – exactly the type of person that the more populist people in Trump’s orbit would like to oust. “The tech bros are out of control,” Steve Bannon, the head of MAGA populism, told the Times.
Those groups have come under fire in recent months over everything from the Epstein files to efforts to ban states from regulating AI, and it’s led people like Marjorie Taylor Greene to ultimately jump ship. The next test in that divide will come this week with the National Defense Authorization Act, which could include a rule preventing states from passing their own AI-related laws. If he comes in secret, enter the win in the sex column and hang up the L for everyone who is not currently profiting from the AI industry.
<a href