2013-05-30 Verge: Treasury Department Official Says No Anti-Bitcoin Campaign

[n8rwJeTt8TrrLKPa55eU]

Since the Liberty Reserve indictment and the earlier seizure of funds from major Bitcoin exchange MtGox, some worry that this is the beginning of a crackdown on virtual currency. On the other side, people have long worried that Bitcoin could become an easy way to make illegal sales. But in an interview with American Banker, FinCEN director Jennifer Shasky Calvery insists that she's not trying to single them out.

Treasury Department official says money laundering crackdown isn't part of an anti-Bitcoin campaign
http://www.theverge.com/2013/5/30/4380788/treasury-department-says-money-laundering-case-isnt-bitcoin-crackdown

[marcus_of_augustus]

FinCEN director Jennifer Shasky Calvery

I want someone with guts from the lame-stream media (do such people exist?), to ask Jennifer Shasky Calvery to her face why no one from MF Global has been charged, let alone prosecuted, for Grand Larceny (or even simple theft)?

If she is the top official in USA that concerns themselves with "financial crimes" ... what happened here? FinCen have zero credibility until they charge someone, like Jon Corzine, or other high rollers who have been allowed to get away with theft and fraud (robosigning, fraud-closure, etc). So much for their"Enforcement Network". The USA system is corrupt all the way to the top. When the criminals are in charge of the law, why the heck would you want to prostrate yourself before them and beg to be "regulated"?

If MF Global was regulation USA/FinCen style, who needs it?

"It's a part of the financial framework as any other type of financial institution and it has the same obligations as those financial institutions, the same obligations as any money services business out there," she said. "For those that choose to act outside of those obligations and outside of the law, they are going to have to account for that."

Yes Jennifer, you are going to have to account for MF Global and Jon Corzine one day or you are just a festering pit of hypocrisy.

Follow the money.

[aigeezer]

FinCEN director Jennifer Shasky Calvery

I want someone with guts from the lame-stream media (do such people exist?), to ask Jennifer Shasky Calvery to her face why no one from MF Global has been charged, let alone prosecuted, for Grand Larceny (or even simple theft)?

If she is the top official in USA that concerns themselves with "financial crimes" ... what happened here? FinCen have zero credibility until they charge someone, like Jon Corzine, or other high rollers who have been allowed to get away with theft and fraud (robosigning, fraud-closure, etc). So much for their"Enforcement Network". The USA system is corrupt all the way to the top. When the criminals are in charge of the law, why the heck would you want to prostrate yourself before them and beg to be "regulated"?

If MF Global was regulation USA/FinCen style, who needs it?

"It's a part of the financial framework as any other type of financial institution and it has the same obligations as those financial institutions, the same obligations as any money services business out there," she said. "For those that choose to act outside of those obligations and outside of the law, they are going to have to account for that."

Yes Jennifer, you are going to have to account for MF Global and Jon Corzine one day or you are just a festering pit of hypocrisy.

Follow the money.

Your post sent me digging for info. As I understand it, Calvery reports to David Cohen, a former VP of Goldman Sachs. No smoking guns, but hints of what the priorities might be. Long read, but interesting:

http://blogs.reuters.com/financial-regulatory-forum/2012/09/21/new-u-s-fincen-director-must-bolster-agency-under-pressure-over-iran-sanctions-money-laundering/

[justusranvier]

The rumor has now been officially denied.

[n8rwJeTt8TrrLKPa55eU]

Your post sent me digging for info. As I understand it, Calvery reports to David Cohen, a former VP of Goldman Sachs. No smoking guns, but hints of what the priorities might be. Long read, but interesting:

As presidential donor lists and many recent actions have shown, federal politics and regulation in the USA is completely captured by banking interests.

The quickest way to get the US government off Bitcoin's back and even encourage its usage, would be for a GS or JPM be underwriters for a wave of high-profile Bitcoin IPOs, or own a stake in a Gox competitor.

The Bitcoin Foundation should consider redirecting its recently-announced lobbyist from DC to Wall Street.  That's likely to be more effective (and far quicker) in producing Bitcoin-friendly policies.

[marcus_of_augustus]

Your post sent me digging for info. As I understand it, Calvery reports to David Cohen, a former VP of Goldman Sachs. No smoking guns, but hints of what the priorities might be. Long read, but interesting:

As presidential donor lists and many recent actions have shown, federal politics and regulation in the USA is completely captured by banking interests.

The quickest way to get the US government off Bitcoin's back and even encourage its usage, would be for a GS or JPM be the underwriters for a wave of high-profile Bitcoin IPOs.

The Bitcoin Foundation should consider redirecting its recently-announced lobbyist from DC to Wall Street.  That's likely to be more effective and far quicker.

Except you seem to forget that the Federal Reserve Note (aka US dollar) is actually the racket that ultimately belongs to Wall St. (look up who the shareholding of the Federal Reserve Banks, particularly FRB New York, ultimately trace back to ... i.e. follow the money). They are unlikely to be supporting a competing product, bitcoin, to their contract law debt notes that have been granted reserve currency status by the complicit US congress and administrations since 1913. They have gotten riches beyond wildest dreams from running the federal reserve note racket.

[oakpacific]

The rumor has now been officially denied.

We in China sometimes say:"A rumor is not confirmed until it is officially denied."

[n8rwJeTt8TrrLKPa55eU]

Your post sent me digging for info. As I understand it, Calvery reports to David Cohen, a former VP of Goldman Sachs. No smoking guns, but hints of what the priorities might be. Long read, but interesting:

As presidential donor lists and many recent actions have shown, federal politics and regulation in the USA is completely captured by banking interests.

The quickest way to get the US government off Bitcoin's back and even encourage its usage, would be for a GS or JPM be the underwriters for a wave of high-profile Bitcoin IPOs.

The Bitcoin Foundation should consider redirecting its recently-announced lobbyist from DC to Wall Street.  That's likely to be more effective and far quicker.

Except you seem to forget that the Federal Reserve Note (aka US dollar) is actually the racket that ultimately belongs to Wall St. (look up who the shareholding of the Federal Reserve Banks, particularly FRB New York, ultimately trace back to ... i.e. follow the money). They are unlikely to be supporting a competing product, bitcoin, to their contract law debt notes that have been granted reserve currency status by the complicit US congress and administrations since 1913. They have gotten riches beyond wildest dreams from running the federal reserve note racket.

True.  But I'll guess that, at some level, consciously or not, most crooks in the investment banks and in government can surely sense that the unlimited money printing racket and debt-based system is on its last legs, and not likely to outlive this decade.  Perhaps the smarter sociopaths in those circles will figure out which way the wind is likely to blow, and try to diversify into the future economy while they can still leverage their legacy monopoly.

[worldinacoin]

The rumor has now been officially denied.

We in China sometimes say:"A rumor is not confirmed until it is officially denied."

That's a good one   .  China hopefully will be the next huge market for Bitcoin, at least they don't have Fed there.

[marcus_of_augustus]

Your post sent me digging for info. As I understand it, Calvery reports to David Cohen, a former VP of Goldman Sachs. No smoking guns, but hints of what the priorities might be. Long read, but interesting:

As presidential donor lists and many recent actions have shown, federal politics and regulation in the USA is completely captured by banking interests.

The quickest way to get the US government off Bitcoin's back and even encourage its usage, would be for a GS or JPM be the underwriters for a wave of high-profile Bitcoin IPOs.

The Bitcoin Foundation should consider redirecting its recently-announced lobbyist from DC to Wall Street.  That's likely to be more effective and far quicker.

Except you seem to forget that the Federal Reserve Note (aka US dollar) is actually the racket that ultimately belongs to Wall St. (look up who the shareholding of the Federal Reserve Banks, particularly FRB New York, ultimately trace back to ... i.e. follow the money). They are unlikely to be supporting a competing product, bitcoin, to their contract law debt notes that have been granted reserve currency status by the complicit US congress and administrations since 1913. They have gotten riches beyond wildest dreams from running the federal reserve note racket.

True.  But I'll guess that, at some level, consciously or not, most crooks in the investment banks and in government can surely sense that the unlimited money printing racket and debt-based system is on its last legs, and not likely to outlive this decade.  Perhaps the smarter sociopaths in those circles will figure out which way the wind is likely to blow, and try to diversify into the future economy while they can still leverage their legacy monopoly.

Now, that I can appreciate. The rats will be the first to scurry from the sinking ship. Until then I'm unsure that bitcoin really needs them in order to succeed, I would not be upset if they were the last to arrive to the party ...