Bitcoin Forum
March 24, 2019, 05:59:46 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.17.1 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 2292 2293 2294 2295 2296 2297 2298 2299 2300 2301 2302 2303 2304 2305 2306 2307 2308 2309 2310 2311 2312 2313 2314 2315 2316 2317 2318 2319 2320 2321 2322 2323 2324 2325 2326 2327 2328 2329 2330 2331 2332 2333 2334 2335 2336 2337 2338 2339 2340 2341 [2342] 2343 2344 2345 2346 2347 2348 2349 2350 2351 2352 2353 2354 2355 2356 2357 2358 2359 2360 2361 2362 2363 2364 2365 2366 2367 2368 2369 2370 2371 2372 2373 2374 2375 2376 2377 2378 2379 2380 2381 2382 2383 2384 2385 2386 2387 2388 2389 2390 2391 2392 ... 2459 »
  Print  
Author Topic: GAW / Josh Garza discussion Paycoin XPY xpy.io ION ionomy. ALWAYS MAKE MONEY :)  (Read 3212323 times)
maildir
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 916
Merit: 1058


View Profile
September 28, 2016, 10:40:56 PM
 #46821

Right here, another clear cut example:

http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2014/12/01/bitbeat-under-fire-gaw-miners-ceo-garza-takes-on-his-critics/

Quote
As for the charge that GAW is a Ponzi scheme, Mr. Garza pointed out that his principal partner, Cantor Fitzgerald Vice Chairman Stuart Fraser, in whose name the patent for one of Wall Street’s most important bond trading programs is listed, has “got more to lose than all of us combined.” He added, “Why would a guy that already has a ton of money, and would get thrown in jail if he was involved in anything sketchy, be involved in a scam?”

Nice words to rope everyone in to the fraud "partner" "principal partner" even, "founder" ... etc. so what was the public supposed to know back then? That was really, it was all white lies, there is and never was proof that Uncle Stu was nothing more than a hands off silent partner?  Roll Eyes  C'mon Mr. Judge. Got Uncle Stu changing that other press release to make it sound like he was more involved that he was. Which of course we all only find out now, long after the fact?? 


Q:

What is a principal partner?

A:
Quick Answer
A principal partner in a business is the partner that represents the firm. Usually, a principal partner's decisions are representative of the all the partner's interests, and often speaks on behalf on the entire firm.
 



Little White Lies, to lure in more money isn't fraud?  Wink




1553407186
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1553407186

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1553407186
Reply with quote  #2

1553407186
Report to moderator
Your Bitcoin transactions
The Ultimate Bitcoin mixer
made truly anonymous.
with an advanced technology.
Mix coins
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1553407186
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1553407186

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1553407186
Reply with quote  #2

1553407186
Report to moderator
1553407186
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1553407186

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1553407186
Reply with quote  #2

1553407186
Report to moderator
1553407186
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1553407186

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1553407186
Reply with quote  #2

1553407186
Report to moderator
suchmoon
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1890
Merit: 2777



View Profile
September 28, 2016, 11:29:50 PM
 #46822

Garza was supposed to respond by September 5 and the request for extension was thrown out. Maybe there is something in that meeting report (doc #40) that allows him more time, not sure.

Re WSJ: it's funny how the defense lawyers referenced the first blog post as proof that Fraser was merely "backing Mr. Garza” but obviously forgot to mention the second one. No doubt most of these "rebuttals" are similarly selective, not to mention that the leaked e-mails and other public sources represent only a tiny part of what a proper discovery could... ummm... discover.

Edit: Garza was not part of the meetings. Not sure why he's silent.

RoomBot
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1414
Merit: 1091



View Profile
September 29, 2016, 12:30:35 AM
 #46823


Was Stuart Fraser really a MINOR contributor, or contributor to the delinquency of a minor - miner?

Nice try, good delay, but NO WAY can Fraser slime out of this, with those WSJ releases, he is toast.



owlcatz
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764
Merit: 1192


BTC, XMR & VIA FTW


View Profile WWW
September 29, 2016, 01:02:16 AM
 #46824


Was Stuart Fraser really a MINOR contributor, or contributor to the delinquency of a minor - miner?

Nice try, good delay, but NO WAY can Fraser slime out of this, with those WSJ releases, he is toast.





Sadly though, it's not up to any of us. Some random judge will decide it. Hooray USA. Tongue
Phildo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1526
Merit: 1000



View Profile
September 29, 2016, 04:03:48 AM
 #46825

Right here, another clear cut example:

http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2014/12/01/bitbeat-under-fire-gaw-miners-ceo-garza-takes-on-his-critics/

Quote
As for the charge that GAW is a Ponzi scheme, Mr. Garza pointed out that his principal partner, Cantor Fitzgerald Vice Chairman Stuart Fraser, in whose name the patent for one of Wall Street’s most important bond trading programs is listed, has “got more to lose than all of us combined.” He added, “Why would a guy that already has a ton of money, and would get thrown in jail if he was involved in anything sketchy, be involved in a scam?”

Nice words to rope everyone in to the fraud "partner" "principal partner" even, "founder" ... etc. so what was the public supposed to know back then? That was really, it was all white lies, there is and never was proof that Uncle Stu was nothing more than a hands off silent partner?  Roll Eyes  C'mon Mr. Judge. Got Uncle Stu changing that other press release to make it sound like he was more involved that he was. Which of course we all only find out now, long after the fact?? 


Q:

What is a principal partner?

A:
Quick Answer
A principal partner in a business is the partner that represents the firm. Usually, a principal partner's decisions are representative of the all the partner's interests, and often speaks on behalf on the entire firm.
 



Little White Lies, to lure in more money isn't fraud?  Wink






People can, and will, claim that the line in the wsj blog about Fraser's involvement is just as accurate as the information in those posts about the data center, how many bitcoins they had, and all the other horseshit involved.

There's a huge difference between Fraser being intimately involved, and the guy saying that he had miners that could mine on 2 pools at once saying that they were involved.

I don't remember what the emails said, and who knows what will be turned up in discovery, but pointing to a blog post that we all knew was full of bullshit the second it was posted probably isn't going to get anyone anywhere.
SAmOS
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 165
Merit: 100


View Profile
September 29, 2016, 09:31:54 AM
Last edit: September 29, 2016, 11:00:59 AM by SAmOS
 #46826


Was Stuart Fraser really a MINOR contributor, or contributor to the delinquency of a minor - miner?

Nice try, good delay, but NO WAY can Fraser slime out of this, with those WSJ releases, he is toast.





Sadly though, it's not up to any of us. Some random judge will decide it. Hooray USA. Tongue
you are correct in that it is not up to you. you and suchmoon are both stupid bitches if you think stuart or garza will do any jail time. this is an american court case. money equals innocent in america.

yeah just ask madoff or martha stewart
owlcatz
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764
Merit: 1192


BTC, XMR & VIA FTW


View Profile WWW
September 29, 2016, 11:52:08 AM
 #46827

Was Stuart Fraser really a MINOR contributor, or contributor to the delinquency of a minor - miner?
Nice try, good delay, but NO WAY can Fraser slime out of this, with those WSJ releases, he is toast.
Sadly though, it's not up to any of us. Some random judge will decide it. Hooray USA. Tongue
you are correct in that it is not up to you. you and suchmoon are both stupid bitches if you think stuart or garza will do any jail time. this is an american court case. money equals innocent in america.

Maybe so SKERMY, but then again I'm not too worried about it, no effect on my life at all, just entertainment. As for yourself, you obviously have some sort of other vested interest in it since you are always defending these scumbags. Sucks to be you, have a great life! Grin 

yeah just ask madoff or martha stewart

Yeah, that ^^^ too. Cheesy
maildir
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 916
Merit: 1058


View Profile
September 29, 2016, 12:03:03 PM
 #46828

"minority investor"  "just a financial backer"  "no control whatsoever"  "knows nothing about the crypto space"  Roll Eyes

Hand crafted with love and care by Stuart A Fraser

http://archive.is/VWRa2  Wink

Quote
"Although relatively new, cryptocurrency is shifting the economic paradigm and that is reason enough for traditional financial organizations to start taking this seriously," said co-founder and early investor, Stuart Fraser, Vice Chairman and partner, Cantor Fitzgerald, L.P. "With the marrying of innovation, technology, finance and regulation -- I believe that cryptocurrency can provide a value proposition that has never before been contemplated in global commerce and thus has the real possibility of being a viable mainstream currency accepted by the masses around the globe."
maildir
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 916
Merit: 1058


View Profile
September 29, 2016, 12:18:39 PM
 #46829

 Cool

Quote
Subject: RE: ICO/Paycoin release draft - Please Review
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2014 16:09:23 -0500
From: STUART FRASER <aukster@msn.com>
To: Josh Garza <josh@btc.com>



maybe I should be "identified" as a founding Investor? ...said Stuart
Fraser, co-founder/early investor and Vice Chairman......



Quote
Subject: RE: ICO/Paycoin release draft - Please Review
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2014 13:56:31 -0500
From: STUART FRASER <aukster@msn.com>
To: Josh Garza <josh@btc.com>



sure


Quote


Subject: Fwd: ICO/Paycoin release draft - Please Review
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2014 13:54:52 -0500
From: Josh Garza <josh@btc.com>
To: Stuart Fraser <aukster@msn.com>



are you cool with this?


It does not say its coming from cantor

*Josh Garza*
*CEO- *GAW Corp

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: *Harrison Wise* <harrison@wisepublicrelations.com
<mailto:harrison@wisepublicrelations.com>>
Date: Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 12:46 PM
Subject: Re: ICO/Paycoin release draft - Please Review
To: Josh Garza <josh@btc.com <mailto:josh@btc.com>>
Cc: Amber Messer <amber@geniusesatwork.com
<mailto:amber@geniusesatwork.com>>, Christina Sarracino
<christina@wisepublicrelations.com
<mailto:christina@wisepublicrelations.com>>, John McCartney
<john@wisepublicrelations.com <mailto:john@wisepublicrelations.com>>


Also, let's not forget that we also need blessing on Stuart's quote as
noted in the latest draft:


“Although relatively new, cryptocurrency is shifting the economic
paradigm and that is reason enough for traditional financial
organizations to start taking this seriously,” said Stuart Fraser, Vice
Chairman and partner, Cantor Fitzgerald L.P. “With the marrying of
innovation, technology, finance and regulation - I believe that
cryptocurrency can provide a value proposition that has never before
been contemplated in global commerce and thus has the real possibility
of being a viable mainstream currency accepted by the masses around the
globe.”


Thanks

H



Harrison Wise
Wise Public Relations, Inc. <http://www.wisepublicrelations.com>
P: 212-777-3235 <tel:212-777-3235>
M: 917-805-3213 <tel:917-805-3213>


On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 12:11 PM, Josh Garza <josh@btc.com
<mailto:josh@btc.com>> wrote:

I think its ok (there is nothing wrong with it) I would just
question the content.

Assuming regular every day people are going to read it, why not
write it that way? Mention that is will work with credit cards, and
hundreds of thousands of merchants?

I just dont think it really says anything (in its current form).
Maybe I dont get it.

Anyways, thats my view


*Josh Garza*
*CEO- *GAW Corp

On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 12:03 PM, Harrison Wise
<harrison@wisepublicrelations.com
<mailto:harrison@wisepublicrelations.com>> wrote:

Josh - need your blessing/input on this release draft asap -
https://docs.google.com/a/wisepublicrelations.com/document/d/1PW_PHrKUjCJPJYQvqZ_KstkXK8DnZSr-YI5lE58V57Q/edit

Please advise.
H

Harrison Wise
Wise Public Relations, Inc. <http://www.wisepublicrelations.com>
P: 212-777-3235 <tel:212-777-3235>
M: 917-805-3213 <tel:917-805-3213>


On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 4:15 PM, Harrison Wise
<harrison@wisepublicrelations.com
<mailto:harrison@wisepublicrelations.com>> wrote:

Josh - need your feedback/blessing on this asap:

https://docs.google.com/a/wisepublicrelations.com/
<http://wisepublicrelations.com/>document/d/1PW_PHrKUjCJPJYQvqZ_KstkXK8DnZSr-YI5lE58V57Q/edit

Our plan is to release widely on Monday and we need to get
this into hands of relevant tech media and those we met with
yesterday by Tomorrow/Friday morning to properly queue it up.

Please feel free to make any edits directly to this shared
doc or let us know what changes need to be made.

Best,
Harrison

Harrison Wise
Wise Public Relations, Inc.
<http://www.wisepublicrelations.com>
P: 212-777-3235 <tel:212-777-3235>
M: 917-805-3213 <tel:917-805-3213>


 


 

 
 
 
maildir
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 916
Merit: 1058


View Profile
September 29, 2016, 12:27:05 PM
 #46830

owlcatz
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764
Merit: 1192


BTC, XMR & VIA FTW


View Profile WWW
September 29, 2016, 12:29:23 PM
 #46831

Oh nice work!  This made me really laugh though, from that draft link in your post above: Grin



maildir
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 916
Merit: 1058


View Profile
September 29, 2016, 12:44:41 PM
 #46832

All right there, nice and neatly summarized:

https://archive.is/0vo3g#20%



Quote
here is what I am thinking, we will create a equal partnership (50/50) in our holding company "Geniuses At Work Corporation", you can have the voting power (I dont care).

Quote
but the two have financial dealings which see Garza selling a 41% share of his operation to Fraser


Quote

Stuart Fraser of Cantor Fitzgerald

Text messages and emails between Garza and Stuart Fraser reveal a friendship dating back an unknown number of years. Seeing him as the father he never had, Garza texts Fraser:


Just wanted to thank you for all your have done. Much of who I have become today is because of you. I did not have much of a father growing up, and you have very much been that for me throughout much of my life. Love you buddy, josh

More than love, Garza comes across as desperate for the admiration and respect of his mentor. Not only does Garza buy Fraser a car for Christmas, but the two have financial dealings which see Garza selling a 41% share of his operation to Fraser as well as organising various loans.

Discussing one of their deals, Garza writes to Stuart and includes a document detailing his investment in GAW Miners:


Hey,

Take a look at this when you get a chance, I would like to get things cleaned up between us.

Like I mentioned, my goal is to get the 200k loan paid to you by July 4th. And the 210k loan to Scott by July 18th.

While there is still time on both loans, I would like to get them cleared up.

Regarding the deal between us. If you remember our original agreement was 240k over a 24 months period to be equal partners on any "new venters" in the same time period.

90k of the 240k has been paid to me, I have shown that in the table in the spreadsheet. Leaving a balance of 150k owed to me.

I have invested 85k of my cash in to GAW Miners to date. Our records show you have invested 135k (outside of the 400k in loans being paid back to you). Please let me know if you have a different amount.

That would make a 50k difference in our equity investment (in your favor). We can handle this one of two ways. Either I can have the company send back 50k to you, this would equalize our investment at 85k.

Or, you can send me 50k of the 150k balance to me (reducing your balance to me to 100k) and I will invest that in to GAW Miners to match your investment of 135k.

Either is fine with me, let me know what you want to do.

Naturally, depending on the outcome, we need then need to clean up the balance still owed to me. I would like to either continue the 10k a month payments, or handle it in some other way.

Our equity of GAW Miners would stand at 41% each. Leaving 18% to be used to raise additional money, employees, etc.

Let me know if I missed anything, I would like to get this behind us

Josh

Discussing money that Garza alleged Stuart Fraser needed to keep out of sight, he writes to his staff members Juliette Dunlevy and Dan Pease:


Hello,

Stuart needed to keep money “out of sight” a few weeks ago, so he borrowed it from me.

Because of that, he is not in a position to move any money around for a few months.

As such, he has asked that the company pay me back, and he will pay back the company in a few months. The amount is 150k.

Please characterize it as a loan to him.

Thank you for your attention and discretion. And yes, even millionaires borrow money from each other

Lamenting the sale of almost half of GAW Miners to Stuart Fraser, Garza writes:


I was thinking after our call.

We should figure out how we want to handle things between us going forward, for not other reason so that we are on the same page. We dont really ever talk about it, but we should, its has not be revised for years.

I think its important that we figure how we want to handle things as new things have been developed (some with your investment, and some without) And it will become confusing if we dont sort it out now. LIke you said, money changes everything.

I propose a simple solution, we split every system and company in half. I am both aware of the value of all you have invested in the past to get us here. As well as the value of the systems and companies (GAW Labs and VP) I have built. In its current course (even without Dan), GAW Labs will have over 3m in contracts by the end of the year.

The exception would be GAW HSI, which would you would own 80% of. I dont feel right about splitting GAW because of what you have invested. But I will continue to grow its value.

Going foard, here is what I am thinking, we will create a equal partnership (50/50) in our holding company "Geniuses At Work Corporation", you can have the voting power (I dont care). I will put in everything I have built:

– My equity stake in CP
– Any patents Joe or I create
– My entire voice platform
– The new App system (the one we talked about at Mt snow)
– smart-tech
– GAW Labs
– Joe deal (I know you probably figure this is assumed, but the equity in GAW Labs (voice system) is how we are doing the deal)

In other words, I would split every deal and every system I have developed with you.

Here is what I would like:

– 10k per month investment paid to Geniuses at Work Corporation for 24 months (to pay myself with). I have coninued to lower my salary over the last few years (not complaining about)
– Forgive the hillcrest debt (around 230k)
– Allow me to live down the investment you made in GAW in the past. I feel so bad every time its brought up. I will still/always continue to try and recoup your losses.
– The 150k that you have already agreed to, per the term sheet we reviewed at your house. But I would like for this to only be a "*one time*" infusion. On other words, its *not* perpetual, and there is *no* exsepction of farther investment
– Help with Howard on CP

Hope you feel these are fair and reasonable terms. They are meant to be a starting point of a discussion. I think its important that we clear this up and move forward.

I am sure you get tired of hearing it. But I can never thank you enough for all you have done and continue to do. I am proud of everything we have done this year. GAW HSI, Smart-Tech, and GAW Labs are all cash flow positive. And we could have not gotten here without your support.

I cant tell you how important it was for me to feel like I could "do it"!

Garza gets no response from Fraser, so he emails him again and again. Finally, Garza relents and wishes to continue with the original deal he made with Fraser to which Fraser says thanks. Garza writes:


I thought a lot about it.

Obviously I never thought when I made the deal that I would end up giving up half a company this successful. But, like you said, it could have gone either way. And one of the many things you taught me was to always honor your deals, the good and bad ones.

Yes I have worked hard to build this company, but I would not here where I am today without you. No question in my mind.

So in light of all that, let's finish the deal as planned. You can pay out the rest of the cash to me, and I will issue you the 41% you deserve. If it's cool with you, let's keep each of us at 41% so there is equity avaliable for investors.

Sounds good?
Phildo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1526
Merit: 1000



View Profile
September 29, 2016, 12:45:19 PM
 #46833

that press release and email is much more damning than the wsj horseshit.

Should be fun.

Edit:

Although the qntra post throws things back into the muck. Josh says "stuart says this" and a lack of responses from stuart.

not sure how hard it will be for fraser to argue he was conned also and didn't see a dime.
maildir
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 916
Merit: 1058


View Profile
September 29, 2016, 01:44:53 PM
 #46834

Actually I think we are wasting our time. Pretty much everything is in the complaint:

http://ia601502.us.archive.org/26/items/gov.uscourts.ctd.112576/gov.uscourts.ctd.112576.1.0.pdf  #32 


The detailed defense is to all of these claims we are high lighting again. Their defense is that there is no proof to any of this and all he was, was a minority financial backer with zero input. Their contention is that it needs to be proved he had control, against that specific law, if he is to be held liable. Nothing else matters as far as the defense is concerned.

So I don't know what the next step would be for the plaintiffs in this regard.

Also checking back the files, seems Homero's extension was accepted to the 8th October. Long before the plaintiff's next step is required.  So now the ball is in Homero's court. How will he respond and what will he say. Try to implicate Uncle Stu, thus bolstering the plaintiff's claims, or shoulder the entire thing himself, keep Uncle Stu's record clean, maybe get his legal bills paid off in return, declare bankruptcy, spend some time in the hole for his crime, and that ends that.

SPEED IT UP HOMERO, WE AIN'T GO ALL DAY !  Cheesy
BitBanksy
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 350
Merit: 250



View Profile
September 29, 2016, 02:30:07 PM
 #46835

Quote from: maildir
So I don't know what the next step would be for the plaintiffs in this regard...

The plaintiff's lawyer didn't play all it's cards yet... Remembre we are at the préliminaire hearings and there is much road to do. We can all be confident that the plaintiffs' lawyer is well aware of all the evidences against Fraser & Garza and that in due time they will use concise arguments.

Besides, what matter the most from a lawyer's point of view is to drag a case on and on so as to inflate the fees! And that's exactly what's happening. I worked for a lawyer in the past and trust me I know what I'm talking about. This first motion (and not the last) has already cost uncle Stue at least 5K!

suchmoon
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1890
Merit: 2777



View Profile
September 29, 2016, 04:44:39 PM
 #46836

that press release and email is much more damning than the wsj horseshit.

Should be fun.

Edit:

Although the qntra post throws things back into the muck. Josh says "stuart says this" and a lack of responses from stuart.

not sure how hard it will be for fraser to argue he was conned also and didn't see a dime.

Apparently his best chance is to argue it NOW (i.e. to dismiss) because if this goes to court for real and they can subpoena GAW employees, CF employees, WSJ bloggers, or whoever had actual knowledge of what was said and done then it would be much harder to control it. Don't forget Elise, who must be mightily pissed about that credit card right now.

Obviously they didn't take any precautions in their communications - which might mean that maybe they weren't intentionally conspiring - but it's also a massive amount of dirty laundry so who knows what can be found there.



RoomBot
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1414
Merit: 1091



View Profile
September 29, 2016, 10:27:36 PM
 #46837

Right here, another clear cut example:

http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2014/12/01/bitbeat-under-fire-gaw-miners-ceo-garza-takes-on-his-critics/

Quote
As for the charge that GAW is a Ponzi scheme, Mr. Garza pointed out that his principal partner, Cantor Fitzgerald Vice Chairman Stuart Fraser, in whose name the patent for one of Wall Street’s most important bond trading programs is listed, has “got more to lose than all of us combined.” He added, “Why would a guy that already has a ton of money, and would get thrown in jail if he was involved in anything sketchy, be involved in a scam?”

Nice words to rope everyone in to the fraud "partner" "principal partner" even, "founder" ... etc. so what was the public supposed to know back then? That was really, it was all white lies, there is and never was proof that Uncle Stu was nothing more than a hands off silent partner?  Roll Eyes  C'mon Mr. Judge. Got Uncle Stu changing that other press release to make it sound like he was more involved that he was. Which of course we all only find out now, long after the fact?? 


Q:

What is a principal partner?

A:
Quick Answer
A principal partner in a business is the partner that represents the firm. Usually, a principal partner's decisions are representative of the all the partner's interests, and often speaks on behalf on the entire firm.
 



Little White Lies, to lure in more money isn't fraud?  Wink






People can, and will, claim that the line in the wsj blog about Fraser's involvement is just as accurate as the information in those posts about the data center, how many bitcoins they had, and all the other horseshit involved.

There's a huge difference between Fraser being intimately involved, and the guy saying that he had miners that could mine on 2 pools at once saying that they were involved.

I don't remember what the emails said, and who knows what will be turned up in discovery, but pointing to a blog post that we all knew was full of bullshit the second it was posted probably isn't going to get anyone anywhere.

One of those "blog posts" was a paid advertisement.  Burden is on the advertiser to be accurate.
sirazimuth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1484
Merit: 1127


born once atheist


View Profile
September 29, 2016, 11:48:49 PM
 #46838


Was Stuart Fraser really a MINOR contributor, or contributor to the delinquency of a minor - miner?

Nice try, good delay, but NO WAY can Fraser slime out of this, with those WSJ releases, he is toast.





Sadly though, it's not up to any of us. Some random judge will decide it. Hooray USA. Tongue
you are correct in that it is not up to you. you and suchmoon are both stupid bitches if you think stuart or garza will do any jail time. this is an american court case. money equals innocent in america.

go take a long walk on a short pier yu worthless pile of shite

Bitcoin...the future of all monetary transactions...and always will be
kken01
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 896
Merit: 1007


View Profile
October 01, 2016, 11:49:49 AM
 #46839

its about on par with money equals innocent in america

ps: garza is not rich. read the leaked tax documents
maybe he got some of that ponzi money stashed but i doubt it
bitpop
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2436
Merit: 1045


https://keybase.io/bitpop


View Profile WWW
October 02, 2016, 10:05:00 AM
 #46840

Never thought I'd see people dumber than paycoiners

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WI6l4N4MQaE&t=11089




Reputation  |  PGP  |  DigitalOcean  |  TorGuard  |  Ethereum Classic
Bitcoin: 3DSh6AnmvBpDJFUz2mnLirMLmTMcFs9nDm
Bitmessage: BM-2cXN9j8NFT2n1FxDVQ6HQq4D4MZuuaBFyb
Pages: « 1 ... 2292 2293 2294 2295 2296 2297 2298 2299 2300 2301 2302 2303 2304 2305 2306 2307 2308 2309 2310 2311 2312 2313 2314 2315 2316 2317 2318 2319 2320 2321 2322 2323 2324 2325 2326 2327 2328 2329 2330 2331 2332 2333 2334 2335 2336 2337 2338 2339 2340 2341 [2342] 2343 2344 2345 2346 2347 2348 2349 2350 2351 2352 2353 2354 2355 2356 2357 2358 2359 2360 2361 2362 2363 2364 2365 2366 2367 2368 2369 2370 2371 2372 2373 2374 2375 2376 2377 2378 2379 2380 2381 2382 2383 2384 2385 2386 2387 2388 2389 2390 2391 2392 ... 2459 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!