> Lutnick Pushed to Weaken Chip Rules That Overlap With His Family Business
Buried well below the fold and below two ads, 20pt, 400 weight:
> These dealings are just a tiny portion of Cantor’s business, which stretches from investment banking and trading to real estate. Other investment banks have similar partnerships, and there is no evidence that Cantor’s investments influenced Mr. Lutnick’s deliberations.
Overlap? These interests are barely even tangent. The Commerce Secretary has a background and experience in financial services; that sounds like a good thing compared to some of the other current adminstration qualifications.
I'm sure if you dig just a little, you'll find he's taken positions that benefit the clients of Piper Sandler, Stifel, and Jefferies as well. Because, despite those firms being competitors of Cantor, the Commerce Secretary will often take positions that benefit US commerce. And all of those firms who benefit and a larger than a lemonade stand will be clients of some financial services company/ies.
I feel like NYT's standards used to be higher than that...
Corruption is corruption. The fact that he was “only” setting policy to benefit a small portion of his portfolio is not a mitigating factor.
Remember when politicians used to put assets in blind trusts and divest investments that could create even the perception of conflicts of interest?
It’s not the NYT’s standards that have fallen, it’s the American populace’s. “The oligarch billionaire probably only benefitted to the tune of tens of millions” is damning.
Now we have a President making billions while in office and others in his administration like Lutnick here making bank too.
I wonder how long until this post gets flagged off of HN since the usual lackeys will rage flag this and we have no way to vouch for it back like we do with comments
Exactly. They will do this over and over again like it's their job and it adds up. Nevermind the fact that this small "tens of millions" deal is more than the vast majority will earn in a lifetime. Who in their right mind is dismissing this as something small and meaningless? This guy is screwing everyone over to enrich himself. We need to raise our standards.
I think the argument would be that you don't "wait around" so long to get to the point. Oftentimes a news story can be written with the main point in the headline, summarized in the first paragraph and then really explained using the rest of the article.
It's fair in my mind to complain that you have to read a bunch of fluff (arguably to drive ad impressions) to find the actual news part. I expect that from HuffPo for sure, less so from NYT.
The inverted pyramid is a well documented technique for getting to the point quickly, and if you search it you'll find tons of articles by big name schools and institutions explaining it. Here's one.
https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/subject_specific_writing/journali...
Which would be a reasonable argument but it's not the one that sokoloff made. They clearly have issues with the accusation that Lutnick is corrupt.
> Overlap? These interests are barely even tangent.
> I feel like NYT's standards used to be higher than that...
You can see there's nothing in their comment that highlights frustration with an ability (or lack of) to find the information they clicked to read about.
Did we read the same first half of the comment? It describes font size and weight of the headline and the font size and weight and how far down the first supporting fact is.
There is then further commentary on how relevant or not relevant the fact is. But the first half of the complaint is literally about the organization and formatting.
Do you understand how English works? The part I quoted is the thesis, the first half is the evidence provided for that. It’s not “further commentary,” it’s the entire thrust of the comment. I genuinely don’t see how you can think the two halves are unrelated.
Is it corruption when a Commerce recommendation benefits a Cantor client and, I guess, incompetent corruption when it instead benefits clients of Piper Sandler, Stifel, and Jefferies? Or it all Commerce working to further the goals of the country?
If Commerce helps 1000 companies, it's not a problem if Cantor has 5% of the overall market as clients and 4-6% of the companies helped are Cantor clients.
There may very well be corruption here; this article doesn't arrive in the neighborhood of convincing me (I consider myself neither red nor blue, but mostly disgusted with the outcome of the two party system that we seem stuck with.)
I’m not sure why you felt it was germane to highlight the font size difference between the headline and body of the article. It is following their usual formatting style. You also chose to cherry-pick a tiny section. Here’s the next paragraph:
> But the overlapping relationships are the latest indication of the potential conflicts that exist given Mr. Lutnick’s role in shaping rules around U.S. technology exports. And they demonstrate how the U.S. ban on selling chips directly to China has led to an explosion of data centers in Southeast Asia aimed at Chinese customers. It is now up to Mr. Lutnick to decide whether to tighten the rules in ways that would cut off this avenue.
The article concludes with:
> Still, Cantor Fitzgerald continued to help arrange billions of dollars of financing for industries ranging from data centers to cryptocurrency that depend on a steady supply of computing from Nvidia.
> That includes Bitdeer, which is building out the Malaysian data center it expects to generate $1.7 billion in revenue over five years, according to a company statement.
> That data center will likely serve Tencent, a Chinese internet giant that would be able to gain access to Nvidia’s most advanced A.I. servers, according to a person with knowledge of the arrangement. Bitdeer is part of Nvidia’s partner network, a program for companies that work closely with the chipmaker.
> Bitdeer hosts a Chinese language website that lets customers rent A.I. chips and gain access to Chinese open source A.I. models through data centers in Malaysia, Canada and elsewhere. The Johor facility is one of five data centers the company plans to open in Malaysia in the coming years, according to filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
> Cantor holds a stake in Bitdeer through its investment in Tether, the crypto company. It is far from the only American financial heavyweight investing in overseas data centers. Bain Capital, Citadel and Blackstone have all poured money into A.I. computing clusters across the region.
> Cantor also previously provided financial services to Gorilla Technology, which is building data centers in Thailand and Indonesia, and has a contract to provide A.I. computing to Freyr AI, a Singaporean data center firm that corporate filings and job ads indicate has ties to China.
> Cantor has worked with other Nvidia partners globally, including IREN, an Australian cloud computing company, and Lancium, a Texas data center developer.
> A Commerce Department spokeswoman said that Mr. Lutnick makes policy decisions based on the best interests of the United States. He does not discuss department matters with his sons, nor do they discuss Cantor Fitzgerald business with him, she added.
> Cantor Fitzgerald declined to comment. Bitdeer did not reply to a request for comment.
> Mr. Lutnick, as of October 2025, transferred his remaining ownership stake in Cantor to his family. Before that, he had been given what the White House had called a “limited waiver” that allowed him to participate in certain decisions that could have “a direct and predictable effect on Cantor Fitzgerald,” exempting him from a federal criminal law that would otherwise have required him to entirely recuse himself from these discussions.
> Even after Mr. Lutnick finished transferring his ownership stake to his sons late last year, he still had to abide by an ethics rule prohibiting federal employees from using their public office for their private gain or the gain of friends and relatives.
> The Times reported last year that Mr. Lutnick was promoting data center projects that worked with his family firms. Senator Elizabeth Warren, Democrat of Massachusetts, and two dozen other Democratic lawmakers called for an investigation.
It is apparent there is a conflict of interest but the NYT was unable to find an explicit causal connection. The headline is objectively correct and in most administrations of the past, overlapping interests like this would constitute a scandal and would call for further investigation.
> These dealings are just a tiny portion of Cantor’s business, which stretches from investment banking and trading to real estate
So an even larger attack surface for corruption in Mr. Lutnick's Cabinet role.
> The Commerce Secretary has a background and experience in financial services; that sounds like a good thing compared to some of the other current adminstration qualifications.
"Financial services" and commerce, writ large, are not the same thing.
The NYT may well be chasing clicks through its creative use of typography. But the defense of a genuinely offensive and quite possibly corrupt individual like Howard Lutnick isn't a hill I'd prefer to die on.
> Lutnick Pushed to Weaken Chip Rules That Overlap With His Family Business
Buried well below the fold and below two ads, 20pt, 400 weight:
> These dealings are just a tiny portion of Cantor’s business, which stretches from investment banking and trading to real estate. Other investment banks have similar partnerships, and there is no evidence that Cantor’s investments influenced Mr. Lutnick’s deliberations.
Overlap? These interests are barely even tangent. The Commerce Secretary has a background and experience in financial services; that sounds like a good thing compared to some of the other current adminstration qualifications.
I'm sure if you dig just a little, you'll find he's taken positions that benefit the clients of Piper Sandler, Stifel, and Jefferies as well. Because, despite those firms being competitors of Cantor, the Commerce Secretary will often take positions that benefit US commerce. And all of those firms who benefit and a larger than a lemonade stand will be clients of some financial services company/ies.
I feel like NYT's standards used to be higher than that...
Remember when politicians used to put assets in blind trusts and divest investments that could create even the perception of conflicts of interest?
It’s not the NYT’s standards that have fallen, it’s the American populace’s. “The oligarch billionaire probably only benefitted to the tune of tens of millions” is damning.
That is literally from Cantor’s website.
Now we have a President making billions while in office and others in his administration like Lutnick here making bank too.
I wonder how long until this post gets flagged off of HN since the usual lackeys will rage flag this and we have no way to vouch for it back like we do with comments
It's fair in my mind to complain that you have to read a bunch of fluff (arguably to drive ad impressions) to find the actual news part. I expect that from HuffPo for sure, less so from NYT.
The inverted pyramid is a well documented technique for getting to the point quickly, and if you search it you'll find tons of articles by big name schools and institutions explaining it. Here's one. https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/subject_specific_writing/journali...
> Overlap? These interests are barely even tangent.
> I feel like NYT's standards used to be higher than that...
You can see there's nothing in their comment that highlights frustration with an ability (or lack of) to find the information they clicked to read about.
There is then further commentary on how relevant or not relevant the fact is. But the first half of the complaint is literally about the organization and formatting.
But you know, cherry pick what you dont want to hear.
Is it corruption when a Commerce recommendation benefits a Cantor client and, I guess, incompetent corruption when it instead benefits clients of Piper Sandler, Stifel, and Jefferies? Or it all Commerce working to further the goals of the country?
If Commerce helps 1000 companies, it's not a problem if Cantor has 5% of the overall market as clients and 4-6% of the companies helped are Cantor clients.
There may very well be corruption here; this article doesn't arrive in the neighborhood of convincing me (I consider myself neither red nor blue, but mostly disgusted with the outcome of the two party system that we seem stuck with.)
> But the overlapping relationships are the latest indication of the potential conflicts that exist given Mr. Lutnick’s role in shaping rules around U.S. technology exports. And they demonstrate how the U.S. ban on selling chips directly to China has led to an explosion of data centers in Southeast Asia aimed at Chinese customers. It is now up to Mr. Lutnick to decide whether to tighten the rules in ways that would cut off this avenue.
The article concludes with:
> Still, Cantor Fitzgerald continued to help arrange billions of dollars of financing for industries ranging from data centers to cryptocurrency that depend on a steady supply of computing from Nvidia.
> That includes Bitdeer, which is building out the Malaysian data center it expects to generate $1.7 billion in revenue over five years, according to a company statement.
> That data center will likely serve Tencent, a Chinese internet giant that would be able to gain access to Nvidia’s most advanced A.I. servers, according to a person with knowledge of the arrangement. Bitdeer is part of Nvidia’s partner network, a program for companies that work closely with the chipmaker.
> Bitdeer hosts a Chinese language website that lets customers rent A.I. chips and gain access to Chinese open source A.I. models through data centers in Malaysia, Canada and elsewhere. The Johor facility is one of five data centers the company plans to open in Malaysia in the coming years, according to filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
> Cantor holds a stake in Bitdeer through its investment in Tether, the crypto company. It is far from the only American financial heavyweight investing in overseas data centers. Bain Capital, Citadel and Blackstone have all poured money into A.I. computing clusters across the region.
> Cantor also previously provided financial services to Gorilla Technology, which is building data centers in Thailand and Indonesia, and has a contract to provide A.I. computing to Freyr AI, a Singaporean data center firm that corporate filings and job ads indicate has ties to China.
> Cantor has worked with other Nvidia partners globally, including IREN, an Australian cloud computing company, and Lancium, a Texas data center developer.
> A Commerce Department spokeswoman said that Mr. Lutnick makes policy decisions based on the best interests of the United States. He does not discuss department matters with his sons, nor do they discuss Cantor Fitzgerald business with him, she added.
> Cantor Fitzgerald declined to comment. Bitdeer did not reply to a request for comment.
> Mr. Lutnick, as of October 2025, transferred his remaining ownership stake in Cantor to his family. Before that, he had been given what the White House had called a “limited waiver” that allowed him to participate in certain decisions that could have “a direct and predictable effect on Cantor Fitzgerald,” exempting him from a federal criminal law that would otherwise have required him to entirely recuse himself from these discussions.
> Even after Mr. Lutnick finished transferring his ownership stake to his sons late last year, he still had to abide by an ethics rule prohibiting federal employees from using their public office for their private gain or the gain of friends and relatives.
> The Times reported last year that Mr. Lutnick was promoting data center projects that worked with his family firms. Senator Elizabeth Warren, Democrat of Massachusetts, and two dozen other Democratic lawmakers called for an investigation.
It is apparent there is a conflict of interest but the NYT was unable to find an explicit causal connection. The headline is objectively correct and in most administrations of the past, overlapping interests like this would constitute a scandal and would call for further investigation.
Imagine all the laywers in any administration, then imagine all the clients that their firms had ever represented.
So an even larger attack surface for corruption in Mr. Lutnick's Cabinet role.
> The Commerce Secretary has a background and experience in financial services; that sounds like a good thing compared to some of the other current adminstration qualifications.
"Financial services" and commerce, writ large, are not the same thing.
The NYT may well be chasing clicks through its creative use of typography. But the defense of a genuinely offensive and quite possibly corrupt individual like Howard Lutnick isn't a hill I'd prefer to die on.