Oddbean

As I said acknowledging you have customers that use your product for criminal use-cases is not a crime. Using/operating a market over Tor is not a crime, although those markets are commonly used to buy illicit substances. Those are true free markets. There is nothing illegal happening on page 9. Obviously the DOJ thinks they can get a conspiracy conviction. But only because enough people read into it the same way you are.

I’m reading it like it’s the law. I’m not reading it like it shouldn’t be this way but it is. I’m reading it like this is the law. They knew it was the law. I’m not a judge. I guess we’ll find out how they interpret it but if this was just code, that’s one thing but that’s not what this is. You are marketing a service to la money you seriously don’t see that?

Again, you are pearl clutching over a jpg or two of what the DOJ (rather dogily) calls "marketing materials" obviously you are happy to take their word for it and buy their line that these jpgs and their mention of "illicit" and "restricted" markets constitute "marketing their service to launder money" without any further context. Sad.

I’m not Pearl clutching over anything I think you’re clutching a bit you’re not even open to the idea that maybe some of this isn’t gonna go over well in court. Will find out if they make a deal. And nothing dodgy about marketing materials that actually express what you do what services you offer and what you charge that is exactly the definition of marketing materials. I own my own business and when I put together things they have a description and a price what I can do for them and I offer. Maybe I’m doing that wrong and I just found out right now thanks to you and the DOJ.

Nobody knows and we can only argue about what is known. If this is all the DOJ has got then i think a lot will come down to if/how these jpgs were presented to investors. If they were just files on someone's computer, their case probably goes nowhere. if they have more in this vein, it will not go well for Samourai. But the point is, you're taking THEIR word for it at this time.

Yes, and so will a jury. The point you’re missing is my opinion doesn’t matter neither is yours whether you like it or not they will present their evidence and this is just what they used to get a warrant. They don’t lay out an entire case in an indictment. but again do your research on that and stop fighting with me you’re not making any sense

I don’t want this for them i’m looking at it as if I were a juror in a federal case and how many jurors do you think even understand Bitcoin but they sure know what money laundering is. None of this is good for them whether we like it or not I’m just being realistic. I think it’s possible if it turns out better than I’ll be thrilled and I will be happy to celebrate right now. It doesn’t look good.

They don’t care if I take their word for it or not, and they don’t care if you do either or anyone else we don’t have any control and believe it or not there are laws and things they follow when they prosecute things like this if there’s enough money in it for them or a lesson to be learned, they’re gonna do it. my original point was they could’ve done better and if they had tried harder not to thumb their nose or be so cocky or market there Black and grace transaction services would’ve been way easier to back them up

...... not sure that long, unpuctuated run-on paragraph actually makes a point that relates to we were talking about. yes indeed, they will stretch the law to try and incriminate the people they want to put away. that why we contribute to their legal defense. but I was pointing out that you are taking the DOJs word re "marketing materials" and already imagining a pitch deck to Russian oligarch investors and DNM operators. which is no doubt exactly the point of them releasing this material without any context. what I mean is, they DONT say that in the indictment. that is YOUR imagination.

Dude, your commenting on my run-on sentence. I’m using voice just fuck off. I mean it’s so stupid. You’re so wrapped up in anything but what you’re actually supposed to be talking about let me I’m gonna just ramble on here with no punctuation for a while and I hope this makes your brain feel betterbecause I’m not even gonna bother to talk to someone who is this ridiculous bye

nobody is calling it "marketing material" except the DOJ. YOU ARE TAKING THEIR WORD THAT IS WHAT IT IS, THAT IT WAS USED IN THAT WAY AND ALREADY MAKING ALL KINDS OF ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT IT. It is a jpg on a website and we know nothing else about it. but for some reason you find the DOJ narrative very convincing and are already ready to convict them. (although constantly protesting you'd rather it was some other way) and yet claim to be logical and realistic. pretty weird honestly.

I showed it to you. It was on their website and it was on their Twitter account countless times. I’m not taking anyone’s word for it you have no idea what you’re saying you haven’t done any of your own research and the only thing you’re focused on is grammar and pearls and other dumb shit so don’t argue with me unless you really can

FYI, this is the indictment. It won’t have every bit of the evidence that is against them on it. it’s not a judgment. I’m not sure you understand that I don’t want it to turn out this way but they did nothing to help themselves. Have it turn out a different way and you’re grasping at straws.

They created decks to give to people who wanted to know what they did and what their services were. There’s actual illustrations of it in the indictment dude I’m not arguing with you because I’m realizing now you don’t have a clue what you’re talking about. You’re talking about the Netherlands and the US and these are two different countries with two different laws. Go research some other cases and then come back and tell me that this is a one off that everybody’s out to get them and they didn’t do anything.

OK, I’m done with you and even your back door. Snarkiness is obnoxious and you don’t know what you’re talking about so maybe instead of fighting me do some research yourself and then you tell me if this is some clean case that they did nothing wrong absolutely zero and should’ve never been charged by the American government. I don’t mean what you feel like they should’ve been charged in your own mind government I mean, actual real courts.

Then what does this mean why would they break out black and gray transactions on a separate line? Why wouldn’t it just say all transactions are X. it appears they were able to set their own fee structure.. There’s another line there that’s blurred it wasn’t magic it was humans. The second picture is where they explain on Twitter they are non-Ky https://m.primal.net/IJbQ.jpg

According to who is it not a crime? If you have no KYC and you are laundering money for people and your advertising it and you’re putting it in your deck it’s against the law to promote money laundering services

It not a crime because there is no federal statute about operating a tor market. It doesnt "promote money laundering" it simply acknowledges they have customers that use their service for illicit purposes. That isnt "promoting money laundering." you're pretty quick to jump up and down about "marketing money laundering services" when essentially all we have is a jpeg in the indictment and the DOJs word for it. you're acting like they took out a full page NYT ad WASH YOUR DNM BITCOIN WITH SAMOURAI its not the same thing. nowhere do they "promote money laundering" or advertise for that purpose. although I have no doubt that is what the DOJ will argue and obviously you agree with them. also expect their defense to make similar points to what i just did. ie, "having criminals as customers doesnt make you one." "noncustodial platforms do not have KYC/AML burden"

kids, when the DOJ says they have "marketing materials proving the defendants conspired to assist criminals avoid law enforcement detection" DONT always believe them unquestionably. nostr:nevent1qqsfpsz3xjpg0v2rrz7c3ecvcaaef68gyxa8phdn52te6evtj8ucjvgpzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumn0wd68ytnzv9hxgq3qxsn2cx73w7837xhkqalzxr5f9prwn6cvnz4t0e60qa0luff7g4fqxpqqqqqqzazd374

Once again, I’m not in love with the DOJ either but it’s fairly well-known that they spend a good amount of time putting a case together this indictment does not have all the evidence in it probably not even 1/10 of it was to get a warrant for the rest of it, they’ll put in the trial or they will use to get them to make a deal if it’s bad enough. I don’t like the American government but read any of their indictments about anything over the past couple of weeks for example they use dates and times and very seldom. Is it something they just threw together