Earlier quoted context omitted.
Uh, those are the reporter's words, not the prosecutor's. If you read the indictment [1], the word "remotely" never appears, and it's pretty clear the prosecutors understand how Bitcoin works. If anyone's clueless here, it's Gary Harmon, who showed up at his brother's court hearing, learned that the government had not yet secured the Bitcoin that it legally had a right to, then almost immediately moved that Bitcoin t…
Government had bo legal right to the bitcoin. Innocent until proven guilty, means the government stole the bitcoin in a criminal attempt to deny him an adequate defense. You can’t “steal” your own property. The government agents involved are all felons under 18 U.S. Code § 241. Conspiracy against rights - https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/241 and 18 U.S. Code § 242. Deprivation of rights under color of law -…
Feds seized $311M in Bitcoin, then hacker stole it back
171–180 of 229 posts
Re: Feds seized $311M in Bitcoin, then hacker stole it back
#172> The prosecutors accuse Harmon of a very unusual crime: remotely swiping Bitcoin... As opposed to what, "locally" swiping Bitcoin? > ... Bitcoin stored on a computer device the government had already seized in another case Yeah that's your problem Mr. Prosecutor, you have no idea where bitcoins are "stored" or what the device you have seized is. Which leads me to think you are not qualified to "seize" this type of a…
Re: Feds seized $311M in Bitcoin, then hacker stole it back
#173Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is not a spectrum. USA and eu might be. But if someone above you can prevent your from running or electing then it is NOT democracy. Once you are free to do so then may I say no one promise heaven on earth. It is bad human and good in democracy. Sort it out. It is hard. But it is not the same as other sort it out for you.
By your own definition, pretty much no countries, including the US, are democracies, as almost everywhere has mechanisms through which the courts can prevent you from running.
Re: Feds seized $311M in Bitcoin, then hacker stole it back
#174> The prosecutors accuse Harmon of a very unusual crime: remotely swiping Bitcoin... As opposed to what, "locally" swiping Bitcoin? > ... Bitcoin stored on a computer device the government had already seized in another case Yeah that's your problem Mr. Prosecutor, you have no idea where bitcoins are "stored" or what the device you have seized is. Which leads me to think you are not qualified to "seize" this type of a…
Uh, those are the reporter's words, not the prosecutor's. If you read the indictment [1], the word "remotely" never appears, and it's pretty clear the prosecutors understand how Bitcoin works. If anyone's clueless here, it's Gary Harmon, who showed up at his brother's court hearing, learned that the government had not yet secured the Bitcoin that it legally had a right to, then almost immediately moved that Bitcoin t…
Re: Feds seized $311M in Bitcoin, then hacker stole it back
#175Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is not a spectrum. USA and eu might be. But if someone above you can prevent your from running or electing then it is NOT democracy. Once you are free to do so then may I say no one promise heaven on earth. It is bad human and good in democracy. Sort it out. It is hard. But it is not the same as other sort it out for you.
By your own definition, pretty much no countries, including the US, are democracies, as almost everywhere has mechanisms through which the courts can prevent you from running.
Re: Feds seized $311M in Bitcoin, then hacker stole it back
#176Earlier quoted context omitted.
As I understand it your (incorrect) reading of 241 is that when the government securely holds your property pending the final outcome of your trial that violates the clause of 241 that forbids a conspiracy to "injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person". If that was true detaining a person would be a much more serious violation than detaining your property. Now I happen to believe that pretrial detention is…
On the other hand, feds routinely seize defendants assets to prevent them from being able to pay for robust legal defense. Those assets aren't going to harm anyone, so the case for seizing them is much weaker than holding someone accused of violence in jail. In this specific case, the assets are alleged ill-gotten gains, but often that is not the case at all. It doesn't seem to be a stretch that the feds "securely ho…
Re: Feds seized $311M in Bitcoin, then hacker stole it back
#177Earlier quoted context omitted.
As I understand it your (incorrect) reading of 241 is that when the government securely holds your property pending the final outcome of your trial that violates the clause of 241 that forbids a conspiracy to "injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person". If that was true detaining a person would be a much more serious violation than detaining your property. Now I happen to believe that pretrial detention is…
On the other hand, feds routinely seize defendants assets to prevent them from being able to pay for robust legal defense. Those assets aren't going to harm anyone, so the case for seizing them is much weaker than holding someone accused of violence in jail. In this specific case, the assets are alleged ill-gotten gains, but often that is not the case at all. It doesn't seem to be a stretch that the feds "securely ho…
But unfortunately you don't have a right under the constitution to the legal counsel of your choice, and interfering with your ability to pay the legal council you want isn't a federal crimes government agents could go to prison for.
(One of the many reasons why is that the Supreme Court decided a few decades ago that prosecutors have absolute immunity for anything they do on the job, even if they deliberately violated the law.)
Re: Feds seized $311M in Bitcoin, then hacker stole it back
#178Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, in Iran the government has the same monopoly and uses it to pursue its own ends alright. It’s the process that leads to its use, and the purposes that differ.
And how exactly is Iran a democratic society? I think I made a point about totalitarian regimes being different in the way the legitimize that monopoly and use it.
If two party system with hard barriers for a new party to enter needing additional approval from board consisting of the existing parties is a democracy, then so is Iran with all their limitations. Maybe a lesser one than US, but not that different.
Re: Feds seized $311M in Bitcoin, then hacker stole it back
#179Earlier quoted context omitted.
Iran gets trotted out as a strawman in these arguments, but its government is really quite democratic compared to many US allies which have the mere trappings of democracy painted on a dictatorship. Iran has an elected president, and a parliament and multiple parties. As I understand it, the biggest issue with the government as a functioning democracy is that the unelected supreme council can prevent candidates from…
The thing that makes Iran not a democracy is that all those bodies (parliament, president, parties) answer to the supreme leader and religious authority. It’s not a democracy if the elected bodies all answer to unelected ones.
Like the supreme court?
Re: Feds seized $311M in Bitcoin, then hacker stole it back
#180Earlier quoted context omitted.
>The bitcoiner isn't going to hand over his coins for any reason (including torture, torture of family members, bribery, etc). Lol. Lmao, even. Let's just suppose a completely different kind of human.
People have died for less. You are assuming everyone has the same kind of morals and ethics as yourself.
Idk you're suggesting the existence of a human that, while not impossible, must be vanishingly rare. Perhaps you don't really understand what torture means?