Liberty Dollar Sentencing scheduled

[AJinNYC]

Another reason to hate the US government. They just keep piling it on themselves.

[1714531622]

1714531622

[1714531622]

1714531622

[edmundedgar]

The government does not have a constitutional monopoly on money creation, cases like this are an attempt to fabricate it where it doesn't exist in the law.

IANAL and I hate to nitpick but reading the judgement nobody seems to be saying that that government has a constitutional monopoly on money creation. What the court ruled was that the government has the constitutional power to grant itself a _statutory_ monopoly on money creation - in this case specifically metal coins intended for general circulation. (That last bit is presumably the difference with the collectible replica cases.)

Applying it to our situation, I suppose it also means that Congress could pass a law banning bitcoins if they wanted to. This law would be dumb and probably ineffective, but it would be constitutional. But did anyone ever doubt that in the first place?

[NewLiberty]

The government does not have a constitutional monopoly on money creation, cases like this are an attempt to fabricate it where it doesn't exist in the law.

IANAL and I hate to nitpick but reading the judgement nobody seems to be saying that that government has a constitutional monopoly on money creation. What the court ruled was that the government has the constitutional power to grant itself a _statutory_ monopoly on money creation - in this case specifically metal coins intended for general circulation. (That last bit is presumably the difference with the collectible replica cases.)

Applying it to our situation, I suppose it also means that Congress could pass a law banning bitcoins if they wanted to. This law would be dumb and probably ineffective, but it would be constitutional. But did anyone ever doubt that in the first place?

Congress can make laws.  That isn't the issue so much as the misapplication of laws congress has already made.

In United States v.Gellman, 44 F. Supp. 360 (D. Minn. 1942) the court went further and said that Congress had such a law that bars us if 1) it is for use as current money and 2) competes with US currency. 
The Voorhees LD ruling cites this case authoritatively.
This is a mistake of law created by merging two different statutes + a bad precedent.

It could apply to Bitcoin if this mistake of law propagates.

[edmundedgar]

In United States v.Gellman, 44 F. Supp. 360 (D. Minn. 1942) the court went further and said that Congress had such a law that bars us if 1) it is for use as current money and 2) competes with US currency. 

What's the "us" that's getting barred here? They're talking about a law about metal coins.

[idev]

That is a huge miscarriage of justice to say the least. I wish him well.

Bitcoin kind of solves that issue by being p2p and decentralized. There are no entities to target.  

Rather, it puts a target on every one of us.

There are bitcoin users outside of the US, where Fed cant do anything and I think, that is the majority.

Yes, law is fortunately still constrained by political geography.

It's not actually, as long as any issuer is issuing to US citizens regardless of their location they are automatically subjected to US regulation.
And as we have seen in the Liberty Reserve saga the US can come out and touch you in many different jurisdictions.

[KeyserSoze]

"The Justice Department asserted that von NotHaus was placing gold, and silver coins, along with precious metals currency into circulation with the purpose of mixing them “into the current money of the United States.”. In short, the government accused von NotHaus of counterfeiting."
http://libertycrier.com/bernard-von-nothaus-architect-liberty-dollar-sentenced/

I've seen the video where this fellow passed a Liberty Dollar off to an unsuspecting street vendor as money. Apparently, doing so is counterfeiting. Where is this injustice you claim? If you don't like the law, change it. OP's hyperbolic anti-government ranting is childish, not to mention dishonest.

[NewLiberty]

"The Justice Department asserted that von NotHaus was placing gold, and silver coins, along with precious metals currency into circulation with the purpose of mixing them “into the current money of the United States.”. In short, the government accused von NotHaus of counterfeiting."
http://libertycrier.com/bernard-von-nothaus-architect-liberty-dollar-sentenced/

I've seen the video where this fellow passed a Liberty Dollar off to an unsuspecting street vendor as money. Apparently, doing so is counterfeiting. Where is this injustice you claim? If you don't like the law, change it. OP's hyperbolic anti-government ranting is childish, not to mention dishonest.

1) It is money, just as much as anything used in trade is money.  It is not "current money" which is a term of art with a special meaning.  It means specifically the current set of bills and coins issued by the government.
2) There is no law against trading a piece of silver for a hot dog.  Is it also illegal to be circulating hot dogs?  The prosecution fabricated both law and facts to get the guilty verdict because of the vast store of silver and gold they hoped to seize.  This is a case of attempted government theft, only partially averted.
3) They hoped to claim fraud by showing that he didn't have the backing for all the gold and silver warehouse receipts, showing up in a sedan to take out what was claimed to be many tons of gold and silver (it was in fact precisely that and there was no fraud).
4) Your evidence for it being illegal is the government's claim that it is illegal rather than either the law or the facts?  By this logic everyone is guilty as soon as they are accused?
5) Change what law?  None of this was illegal.  It was a spurious claim made by government officials hoping to use the forfeiture laws to line their pockets.  At the sentencing hearing the former head of enforcement for the US Govt for Forfeiture testified ON BEHALF OF THE LIBERTY DOLLAR against the prosecution.  The prosecutors in this case here belong in jail for their use of government force to attempt to ruin the life and reputation of one of America's great living heroes for monetary freedom and liberty.

You sir, are simply uninformed and parroting the government's shit storm.  

[KeyserSoze]

Yep, childish and dishonest seems right on the mark for you.

[seabass1985]

I am sick of the crap that the USA keeps dishing out made up laws just to line there pockets and get there ways just so they can do the same exact things. Wrong just wrong!

[GreenStox]

Wow, so judges can make up laws themselves Why do we have written laws at all then?

In a political case, the so called "justices" are not on the side of the justice, rather on the side of statists, because they pay them and put pressure on them.

The hydra has many heads you know...

[Ron~Popeil]

It is amazing that he will actually get the precious metals back as well. The judge in this case would be an asset in a higher court. The original conviction was an absolute travesty though.

[NewLiberty]

It is amazing that he will actually get the precious metals back as well. The judge in this case would be an asset in a higher court. The original conviction was an absolute travesty though.

There are hundreds, thousands of people that have suffered from the civil forfeiture in this case that may also get theirs back, BUT... The procedure is arduous.
I've contemplated buying as many of the Warehouse Receipts as I could find to save folks from having to undergo the crazy hoops that you have to jump through.  Time is running out though.  The government has some sticky fingers.  

Not much chance of that.
He was a Reagan appointee, and is too close to retirement to be considered in a Democratic administration.


What is amazing is the civil forfeiture laws in the US.  The government can take anything away.

In fact, just a few days ago Obama issued an executive order that could be used for taking things like forums such as this and all its assets if they suspect there may be someone doing anything malicious, because national security.

It empowers the Secretary of the Treasury for example, some very broad powers,

“in consultation with” the Attorney General and Secretary of State, to make a determination that an person or entity has “materially … provided … technological support for, or goods or services in support of any” of these malicious attacks.

Civil forfeiture lets the particular government offices to take most anything, and use it as however they like, even without any actual crime being committed or even alleged.  They can break in, take what you have, and spend it how they like, and it is legal for them to do that.

So when someone like Judge Voorhees provided some measure of ethics to this ruling, it doesn't win him a so many friends in the administration.  He really split the baby on this.

Rule of law is great, only in so far as the laws are great.