Warren Stands Firm on CZ Comments, Calls Them ‘True in All Respects’
U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren is standing her ground against Binance founder Changpeng “CZ” Zhao after her lawyer rejected claims that she defamed him in comments made following his presidential pardon.
The exchange comes after President Trump pardoned the crypto executive, who had previously pleaded guilty to violations under the Bank Secrecy Act.
In a letter obtained by Punchbowl News, Warren’s lawyer, Ben Stafford, said the Senator’s remarks were “true in all respects.”
Letter obtained by Punchbowl News (Source: Punchbowl)
The letter was written in response to a threat of legal action from Zhao’s attorney, Teresa Goody Guillén, who alleged that the senator’s statement on X — asserting that CZ “pleaded guilty to a criminal money laundering charge” — was defamatory.
Stafford dismissed that claim, insisting Warren’s statement was an accurate reflection of public record.
“Senator Warren accurately represented publicly available and widely reported facts,” Stafford wrote, noting that Zhao “pled guilty to a criminal charge, presented through an information by the Department of Justice, and resulting in a prison sentence.”
Warren’s Language Under Scrutiny
The disagreement centers on Warren’s use of the phrase “money laundering charge,” which Zhao contested publicly on X, writing that “There were NO money laundering changes.”
His lawyer, Goody Guillén, told the New York Post that Zhao would sue if Warren did not retract the statement, accusing the Senator of “misusing her office to repeatedly publish defamatory statements that impugn his reputation and cause him further injury.”
Goody Guillén argued that Zhao “pleaded guilty to a single regulatory count — failure to implement an effective anti-money laundering program under the Bank Secrecy Act,” and that this could not be equated to a “criminal money laundering charge.”
But Stafford countered that claim directly, writing that Zhao “did plead guilty to a criminal violation of the Bank Secrecy Act – described by its enforcing agency as ‘our nation’s first and most comprehensive anti-money laundering statute,’” adding that “‘regulatory penalties’ do not exist.”
Legal Protections and Public Figures
Stafford’s letter further argued that Zhao’s potential case would face steep legal hurdles. Because Zhao is a public figure, Stafford said, he would need to prove that Warren made a false statement with “actual malice” — a high standard in U.S. defamation law. “Here, as explained below, Senator Warren’s statement is completely accurate,” the letter stated, describing the applicable standard as “speech-protective.”
Stafford also emphasized that Warren’s post “does not state – and should not be construed to state – that he pled guilty to any other money laundering charge,” seeking to clarify the limits of her wording.
A Battle of Words With Political Weight
The exchange sheds light on the uneasy intersection of politics, regulation, and crypto reputation. Warren, a longtime critic of the digital-asset industry, has consistently pressed for stronger enforcement and greater accountability from crypto firms. Her post-pardon comments about Zhao reignited debate over the government’s handling of financial-crime cases in crypto.
With both sides standing firm — Warren citing factual accuracy and Zhao’s team claiming reputational harm — the dispute has become as much about principle as it is about perception. For now, Warren’s office shows no sign of retracting her statement, framing it instead as a defense of truth and public accountability.
