The cryptocurrency industry has a new line of attack against candidates who have voted for consumer protections on digital coins: calling them corrupt.
In at least two Illinois congressional primaries, candidates vying for the progressive vote are being accused by a crypto political action committee of corruption. Fairshake PAC is trying to smear one candidate backed by Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., as a corporate tool and another candidate who successfully fought a federal indictment as a tax cheat.
The industry has thrown at least $3.3 million into negative attacks on the campaigns in the 2nd and 7th Congressional Districts thus far, according to an analysis from a Chicago political consultant. That spending represents only a fraction of the PAC’s war chest for the remainder of the primary season.
“Ironically, we’re in a very anti-corruption moment, and you know that is true because one of the most corrupt actors in the country is trying to appropriate an anti-corruption argument,” said Jeff Hauser of the Revolving Door Project, a crypto industry critic. “The threat is that the cynical deployment of an anti-corruption politics undermines the potential for success of a genuine anti-corruption politics.”
Fairshake declined to comment.
In both races, crypto industry interests are attacking Democratic candidates — state Sen. Robert Peters and state Rep. La Shawn K. Ford — who voted for consumer protection regulations on cryptocurrency in the Illinois statehouse last year.
That legislation, supported by Democratic Gov. JB Pritzker, forces crypto companies to register with the state and comply with local rules if they want to serve Illinois residents. Crypto companies have long opposed state-level regulations, preferring a single set of looser regulations at the federal level.
As the congressional elections heated up this year, the crypto industry began delivering payback.
Mailers targeting Peters, for instance, accuse him of being a “corporate pawn” and “bankrolled by special interests,” based on campaign contributions he has received.
Peters has responded by noting that he is endorsed by national progressives including Sanders and Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D- Mass., who are fierce foes of corporate interests.
Commenting on the Fairshake mailer, Peters said that it was “paid for by Trump’s top donors, to make sure they buy a lapdog in this congressional seat who will let them avoid all regulation. Nasty work.”
Two of Peters’s top opponents, Jesse Jackson Jr. and Donna Miller, have received A ratings from Stand With Crypto, an industry group, based on their promises to pass industry-friendly legislation. (Their campaigns did not respond to requests for comment.)
Ford, the state representative, has been the target of $2.5 million in attack ads from Fairshake, according to a tally by Chicago political consultant Frank Calabrese.
One TV attack ad highlighted the 17-count bank fraud indictment that federal prosecutors brought against Ford in 2012 — without noting that the case fizzled away and Ford ultimately pleaded guilty to only a misdemeanor tax charge.
Local media have called the ad misleading, a claim that Ford echoed in an interview with The Intercept.
“I think that it’s slander. It’s the reason why we have to have campaign finance reform to get dark money out of races,” he said. “They are misleading voters. Even though they know that, they are advertising that I was convicted of 17 counts of bank fraud and tax fraud, they know that the Department of Justice dropped those charges, and yet they mislead voters.”
Ford’s campaign has sent Fairshake, the crypto PAC, a cease-and-desist letter.
One of Ford’s top opponents in the race to replace outgoing Rep. Danny Davis, City Treasurer Melissa Conyears-Ervin, received an A rating from Stand With Crypto. (Her campaign did not respond to a request for comment.)
Ford noted that industry figures including Brian Armstrong, the CEO of Coinbase, a crypto exchange that is one of Fairshake’s major funders, have worked closely with President Donald Trump to win favorable regulations.
Coinbase donated $1 million to Trump’s inaugural fund in December 2024 and has given further donations to Trump’s White House ballroom project.
“It’s funny, because they are cronies with Donald Trump and they want to say that I’m not fit to go to Congress,” Ford said. “Yet Donald Trump was actually convicted on 34 counts, and they support him for president.”
IT’S EVEN WORSE THAN WE THOUGHT.
What we’re seeing right now from Donald Trump is a full-on authoritarian takeover of the U.S. government.
This is not hyperbole.
Court orders are being ignored. MAGA loyalists have been put in charge of the military and federal law enforcement agencies. The Department of Government Efficiency has stripped Congress of its power of the purse. News outlets that challenge Trump have been banished or put under investigation.
Yet far too many are still covering Trump’s assault on democracy like politics as usual, with flattering headlines describing Trump as “unconventional,” “testing the boundaries,” and “aggressively flexing power.”
The Intercept has long covered authoritarian governments, billionaire oligarchs, and backsliding democracies around the world. We understand the challenge we face in Trump and the vital importance of press freedom in defending democracy.
We’re independent of corporate interests. Will you help us?
IT’S BEEN A DEVASTATING year for journalism — the worst in modern U.S. history.
We have a president with utter contempt for truth aggressively using the government’s full powers to dismantle the free press. Corporate news outlets have cowered, becoming accessories in Trump’s project to create a post-truth America. Right-wing billionaires have pounced, buying up media organizations and rebuilding the information environment to their liking.
In this most perilous moment for democracy, The Intercept is fighting back. But to do so effectively, we need to grow.
That’s where you come in. Will you help us expand our reporting capacity in time to hit the ground running in 2026?
We’re independent of corporate interests. Will you help us?
I’M BEN MUESSIG, The Intercept’s editor-in-chief. It’s been a devastating year for journalism — the worst in modern U.S. history.
We have a president with utter contempt for truth aggressively using the government’s full powers to dismantle the free press. Corporate news outlets have cowered, becoming accessories in Trump’s project to create a post-truth America. Right-wing billionaires have pounced, buying up media organizations and rebuilding the information environment to their liking.
In this most perilous moment for democracy, The Intercept is fighting back. But to do so effectively, we need to grow.
That’s where you come in. Will you help us expand our reporting capacity in time to hit the ground running in 2026?
We’re independent of corporate interests. Will you help us?
Latest Stories
Midterms 2026
Dem in Maine House Primary Funneled PAC Money to Republicans
“Jordan Wood was not a CD2 resident until very recently, and I personally look sideways at someone who moves into a district in order to run.”
In the Room Where Death Row Prisoners Say Final Goodbyes, He Learned He Would Live
I was supposed to witness Sonny Burton’s execution by nitrogen gas. Instead, I saw him celebrate a stunning commutation.
Chilling Dissent
Anti-ICE Protesters Convicted on Terrorism Charges for Wearing All Black
The government won on most of its charges, including convicting defendants for moving a box of radical zines.
Facts Only
Fairshake PAC, a cryptocurrency political action committee, has spent at least $3.3 million on negative ads in Illinois’ 2nd and 7th Congressional District primaries.
The PAC is targeting Democratic candidates state Sen. Robert Peters and state Rep. La Shawn K. Ford, who voted for Illinois cryptocurrency consumer protection regulations in 2023.
The Illinois legislation, supported by Governor JB Pritzker, requires crypto companies to register with the state and comply with local rules.
Fairshake’s ads accuse Peters of being a "corporate pawn" and "bankrolled by special interests," citing his campaign contributions.
Peters is endorsed by Sen. Bernie Sanders and Sen. Elizabeth Warren, both critics of corporate influence.
Ford has been targeted with $2.5 million in attack ads, including a TV ad highlighting a 2012 federal indictment for bank fraud, though most charges were dropped, and he pleaded guilty only to a misdemeanor tax charge.
Ford’s campaign has sent Fairshake a cease-and-desist letter over the ads.
Two of Peters’ opponents, Jesse Jackson Jr. and Donna Miller, received A ratings from Stand With Crypto, an industry group, based on their pro-crypto legislative promises.
City Treasurer Melissa Conyears-Ervin, a top opponent of Ford, also received an A rating from Stand With Crypto.
Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong, a major Fairshake funder, has donated to Donald Trump’s campaigns, including $1 million to Trump’s inaugural fund in December 2024.
The article includes a fundraising appeal from The Intercept, framing Trump’s presidency as an authoritarian threat to democracy and press freedom.
The Intercept describes 2026 as a devastating year for journalism, citing Trump’s contempt for truth and corporate media complicity.
Executive Summary
The cryptocurrency industry, through the Fairshake PAC, is aggressively targeting Democratic candidates in Illinois congressional primaries who supported consumer protection regulations for digital assets. In the 2nd and 7th Congressional Districts, Fairshake has spent at least $3.3 million on negative ads, accusing candidates like state Sen. Robert Peters and state Rep. La Shawn K. Ford of corruption. Peters, endorsed by progressive leaders like Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, is framed as a "corporate pawn," while Ford faces misleading ads about a past indictment that was largely dismissed. Both candidates supported Illinois legislation requiring crypto companies to register with the state, which the industry opposes in favor of looser federal oversight. Fairshake’s tactics include mailers and TV ads, some of which have been criticized as deceptive. Meanwhile, opponents of Peters and Ford have received high ratings from Stand With Crypto, an industry group, based on their pro-crypto stances. The article also highlights broader concerns about Trump’s influence on the crypto industry, with figures like Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong donating to Trump’s campaigns. The piece concludes with a call to support independent journalism, framing Trump’s presidency as an authoritarian threat to democracy and press freedom.
The situation reflects a clash between progressive consumer protection efforts and a well-funded industry pushing for deregulation, with significant financial and political stakes in the outcome of these primaries.
Full Take
The strongest version of this narrative highlights a coordinated effort by the cryptocurrency industry to undermine regulatory oversight by weaponizing anti-corruption rhetoric against its opponents. Fairshake PAC’s tactics—misleading ads, selective framing of past legal issues, and massive spending—exploit public distrust of political elites while obscuring the industry’s own regulatory avoidance. The pattern is classic: reframe consumer protections as "corruption" to rally populist sentiment against progressive candidates, even as the industry aligns with figures like Trump, whose own legal troubles dwarf those of its targets. This is a textbook case of **ARC-0043 Motte-and-Bailey**—demanding deregulation under the banner of "freedom" while attacking opponents as corrupt—and **ARC-0024 Ambiguity**, where past indictments are stripped of context to create a false impression of guilt.
The root cause is a paradigm clash: the crypto industry seeks federal preemption to avoid state-level scrutiny, while progressives push for localized accountability. The unstated assumption is that deregulation benefits innovation, but the cost—financial instability, consumer harm—is externalized onto the public. Historically, this echoes Big Tobacco’s playbook: delay regulation by discrediting advocates, not by engaging on policy merits.
For human agency, the implications are stark. Voters face a flood of dark money distorting their choices, while candidates like Ford and Peters must defend their integrity against manufactured narratives. The second-order effect is erosion of trust in democratic institutions, as industry-funded attacks masquerade as grassroots accountability. Who benefits? Crypto executives and their political allies. Who pays? Consumers and the integrity of electoral discourse.
Bridge questions: If crypto regulations were designed collaboratively with industry and consumer advocates, would the need for such aggressive lobbying diminish? How might voters distinguish between genuine anti-corruption efforts and industry-funded smear campaigns? What would it take for media outlets to resist framing these attacks as "politics as usual" rather than coordinated disinformation?
Counterstrike scan: A bad actor’s playbook would involve flooding races with misleading ads, leveraging past legal issues out of context, and framing regulation as elite overreach—all while aligning with authoritarian figures to secure favorable policies. The actual content matches this pattern closely, particularly in Fairshake’s selective use of Ford’s indictment and its alignment with Trump’s donors. The coordination between industry PACs, media ratings (Stand With Crypto), and political donations suggests a structured influence campaign, not organic political debate. This isn’t mere advocacy; it’s a calculated effort to reshape the regulatory landscape by any means necessary.
Patterns detected: **ARC-0043 Motte-and-Bailey**, **ARC-0024 Ambiguity**, **ARC-0019 False Equivalence** (framing consumer protections as equivalent to corruption).
Sentinel — Human
The article exhibits strong human authorship signals, including a distinct editorial voice, emotional emphasis, and detailed reporting with specific attributions. Minimal stylometric or structural red flags suggest it is overwhelmingly likely to be human-written.