Liberty Dollar Update

[fortinbras]

NORFED's offense is violating 18 USC §486, "Uttering coins of gold, silver or other metal." This section prohibits stamping out coins for use as currency, even if not resembling existing US coins but "of original design." This section is found in chapter 25 of Title 18, which is devoted to "Counterfeiting and Forgery."

Additionally, since the NORFED "Liberty" made use of the image of "Walking Liberty" image that had been used on silver dollars a century ago, it could be argued that NORFED also violated 18 USC §489, "Making or possessing likeness of coins" which forbids making any coin, token or disk "in the likeness or similitude as to design, color, or the inscription thereon of any of the coins of the United States." The section also found in chapter 25.

[The Operative]

I hereby call a red herring alert!

Was Norfed charged with counterfeiting? Was the silver, gold and platinum that backed the paper notes counterfeited or identified as illegal? Were there accusations that the metals were acquired illegally?

The only thing was was possibly illegal was the notes themselves and possibly the private minted coins. The actual metals that backed the notes had nothing to do with the crime of minting a "currency" and it wasn't the property of Norfed it was the property of those holding the Warehouse Receipts.

The only red herring is your inability to read. I did not say that Norfed was charged with counterfeiting. I was giving a counterfeiting crime as AN EXAMPLE. Read the last sentence of what I wrote. I made it bold especially for you.

Counterfeiting is not even remotely the same as what Norfed did. Of course they would take all the drugs and counterfeit money in those crimes, those items are illegal. Gold and silver bullion isn't illegal nor was it acquired illegally. The only thing that may be illegal are the notes and the minted coins not the bullion used to back it. Besides the bullion wasn't even Norfed's it was the certificate holders property. The government knew if they seized all of the backing for the currency it was dead. Now they can sit on it forever, while the pitifully slow wheels of justice turn ,and the currency regardless if its legal or not is dead, end of story.

So, by your reasoning, police shouldn't confiscate the over-the-counter medications and common chemicals used in methamphetamine production, only the produced meth? After all, the over-the-counter medications and common chemicals are perfectly legal to own. However, since they are being used in the furtherance of suspected criminal activity, they should be confiscated. That is exactly what the feds did. They confiscated material that they BELIEVE was being used in the furtherance of SUSPECTED criminal activity.

[SteveSy]

So, by your reasoning, police shouldn't confiscate the over-the-counter medications and common chemicals used in methamphetamine production, only the produced meth? After all, the over-the-counter medications and common chemicals are perfectly legal to own. However, since they are being used in the furtherance of suspected criminal activity, they should be confiscated. That is exactly what the feds did. They confiscated material that they BELIEVE was being used in the furtherance of SUSPECTED criminal activity.

Well at least thats a little closer.

IMO its no different than seizing all the tenants storage items when a storage facility is being accused of operating without a license. They should at least let the people have their bullion.

You guys make such a big deal out of this and all it was is a bunch of people trading certificates. Yes one person might have tried to convince a store clerk that it was legal tender U.S. currency but that's not reason to shut down the entire operation. The bills and coins clearly do not look like U.S. currency. People use Visa gift cards all the time, they too represent privately held currency. While you say Visa cards are legal in substance they're really no different than what Norfed was doing except one is in digital form and the other is minted.

It was just too easy and convenient to seize all of the bullion to shut Norfed down. They don't even have to prove he did something illegal now, Norfed is dead and they knew it would be.

[The Observer]

You guys make such a big deal out of this and all it was is a bunch of people trading certificates. Yes one person might have tried to convince a store clerk that it was legal tender U.S. currency but that's not reason to shut down the entire operation.

And you are conveniently leaving out the part where Norfed had actively encouraged their "customers" to circulate the Libbies as an alternate currency.

The bills and coins clearly do not look like U.S. currency.

And why is that significant? Are you overlooking again the fact that Norfed was pushing Libbies as an alternate currency?

People use Visa gift cards all the time, they too represent privately held currency. While you say Visa cards are legal in substance they're really no different than what Norfed was doing except one is in digital form and the other is minted.

The difference is that the merchant, upon receipt of a Visa gift card, is going to be able to get immediate and full reimbursement of FRNs in their bank account for the amount of the original transaction. The merchant who accepts a Libby has no guarantee that he or she can do anything with the coin - no guarantee that their bank will exchange the coin for FRNs, no guarantee that they will be able to use the coin to purchase supplies, no guarantee that their vendors or employees will accept the coin, and no guarantee that the silver in the coin will retain the value for which they originally accepted.

It was just too easy and convenient to seize all of the bullion to shut Norfed down. They don't even have to prove he did something illegal now, Norfed is dead and they knew it would be.

As it should be - it was a scheme to sell bullion to people who normally would have not invested in a volatile commodity due to their lack of experience and familarity with dealing in precious metals. Norfed was dead on arrival, and the goverment just prevented a bunch of victims from purchasing its carcass.

[cynicalflyer]

Well at least thats a little closer.

IMO its no different than seizing all the tenants storage items when a storage facility is being accused of operating without a license. They should at least let the people have their bullion.

You guys make such a big deal out of this and all it was is a bunch of people trading certificates.

...

It was just too easy and convenient to seize all of the bullion to shut Norfed down. They don't even have to prove he did something illegal now, Norfed is dead and they knew it would be.

Steve, I will assume you did not read the list of potential charges I posted earlier back here

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=2866&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=45#p45100

But, at the risk of repeating myself...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 02267.html

In the affidavit [for the search warrant on NotHaus], an FBI special agent states that he is investigating Norfed for federal violations including "uttering coins of gold, silver, or other metal," "making or possessing likeness of coins," mail fraud, wire fraud, money laundering and conspiracy.

Steve: If the charge is money laundering, the method (Liberty Dollar conversions) and means (i.e. the bullion) would be THE critical pieces of evidence.

You only want to focus on the "uttering coins" and making/possessing likeness of coins charges. The (albeit at this point potential) prosecution is looking at other crimes.

Moreover, the bullion could be evidence as to the "uttering coins" and making/possessing likeness of coins charges if the metal itself would be used to "utter" or make them. This is less likely, more probable is that they metal is as I noted the method/means of a money laundering charge.

[Dezcad]

Alert #23: Answer to US Complaint Filed
August 18. 2008

Dear Liberty Dollar Supporters:
Thank you for your recent orders… We are on a roll… So sample this Alert:
The $1 Peace Dollars are flying out the door. All Hallmarked and Numbered editions are SOLD OUT. So if you want some $1 Peace Dollars ORDER NOW…
I am pleased to inform you that the Liberty Dollar defenders et al filed their Answer to the AUSA Thomas Ascik Complaint on Wednesday, August 13. Please click HERE http://www.libertydollar.org/ld/legal/lawsuit.htm for their 32 page Answer and its six Exhibits, a total of a few hundred pages as we get rolling with our BIG "federal case."

I finally read the Answer and maybe it is just me, but I got a kick out of the following in the Answer:

41. Deny that Liberty Dollars are engraved with the dollar sign of the United
States. Admits that Liberty Dollars are engraved with “$” and the word “dollar.”

Huh?

[fortinbras]

With reference to the dollar sign question. At one time (about 4 years ago) the NORFED website offered a sort of FAQ page which included a paragraph informing people that there were, in fact, TWO kinds of dollar sign - the $ with one vertical stroke meant something different from the $ with two vertical strokes. I forget now which was which, but one of them was supposed to signify precious metal coins and the other (supposedly worthless) paper money.

I had done my own research into the history of the dollar sign (there is a short chapter on it in a book on mathematical signs), including some court cases where this argument had been tried and rejected, and emailed von NotHaus repeatedly to come up with an authority for his claim -- after all, his excuse for overpricing the silver was to cover NORFED's "research" - and he finally admitted there wasn't any and removed that paragraph from his FAQ page.

In case you are perverse enough to be interested: The dollar sign is NOT a monogram of U&S. It predates the American Revolution. It originally was used in bookkeeping to identify amounts in Spanish silver dollars and the sign may have been derived from a monograph for S&P (for SPain, or Spanish Peso, etc), in which case it had one vertical stroke, or an imitation of the design on the coin which showed two upright pillars, which would explain the two vertical strokes. Handwritten accounts show the same clerks using the two versions interchangeably. Early (and modern) books on accounting and banking do not distinguish between the two versions and use whichever version was in the printers' kit, and printing fonts (and typewriters and adding machines) were equipped with only one version - evidently the choice was the whim of the manufacturer.

[Imalawman]

I finally read the Answer and maybe it is just me, but I got a kick out of the following in the Answer:

41. Deny that Liberty Dollars are engraved with the dollar sign of the United
States. Admits that Liberty Dollars are engraved with “$” and the word “dollar.”

Huh?

Technically, they are probably correct in that the dollar sign is not a trademark of the United States. Several other countries use the $ sign merely to denote that the unit of currency is the dollar. Thus, they would be correct in asserting that they are not marking their coins with the United States dollar symbol, but the standard symbol of a unit of currency known as the dollar. The term "dollar" does not refer solely to the United States currency.

[Evil Squirrel Overlord]

One stroke = Illuminati controlled
Two strokes = International Jewish Conspiracy

[grixit]

Just seems like a font variant to me. Arguing that there is some legal distinction is like arguing that "dozen" means something other than 12 when someone writes it with a dash through the "z".

[Demosthenes]

Most of the wingnut types (such as Nuthouse) picked up the two-bar dollar myth from Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged.

[webhick]

Just seems like a font variant to me. Arguing that there is some legal distinction is like arguing that "dozen" means something other than 12 when someone writes it with a dash through the "z".

I once had a social studies teacher (Harvard graduate, mind you) who only put a dashed "z" in Nazi and would dock your grades if you didn't do it too. As a result, 9 times out of 10, I put a dashed "z" in Nazi.

Now it's official Illuminati protocol.

[Evil Squirrel Overlord]

Most of the wingnut types (such as Nuthouse) picked up the two-bar dollar myth from Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged.

Somebody really, really, really needs to invent a time machine so I can go back in time and slap that bitch.

[SteveSy]

In the affidavit [for the search warrant on NotHaus], an FBI special agent states that he is investigating Norfed for federal violations including "uttering coins of gold, silver, or other metal," "making or possessing likeness of coins," mail fraud, wire fraud, money laundering and conspiracy.

Steve: If the charge is money laundering, the method (Liberty Dollar conversions) and means (i.e. the bullion) would be THE critical pieces of evidence.

lol the money laundering charge is nonsense. They simply tacked that on because transactions for the purchasing of the bills involved money and the mail and wire fraud is because transactions took place through the mail and wire. The only thing NorFed did was print private currency, that's it, all of the other BS is just that BS.

You only want to focus on the "uttering coins" and making/possessing likeness of coins charges. The (albeit at this point potential) prosecution is looking at other crimes.

Because that's all he did, if he even did that at all in the illegal sense. All of the other nonsense is just derived from that charge.

No one was damaged by NorFed, no one filed any charges for being ripped off by him, in fact as far as I can tell no one has made any criminal complaint against him except the DOJ. You may think its a ripoff but the bottom line is people liked the currency and they purchased it on their own free will. There's lots of ripoffs out there, and a lot of people waste their money on things we would all agree are stupid ideas, that doesn't make it wrong.

The Fed didn't and doesn't like competition they want the American people locked in to their fiat currency. I am convinced that the only mission of the government was to eliminate an alternative currency by making it impossible to do business whether it was illegal or not. They knew if they seized all of the bullion NorFed was dead, they didn't even have to prove their lame charges to do it. I personally wouldn't buy Libby's, but I think people have a right to transact how they please providing people are aware of what they're getting in to and how the transaction will take place. Just becuase one individual not associated with NorFed might have tried to pass off the notes as U.S. currency is not the fault of NorFed. Even in that one instance the clerk never filed charges and as far as I know never actually took the notes. NorFed did not advocate telling people it was U.S. currency, that it was federal money or that is was legal tender. He did tell people that they should explain what the currency was and try to get more people to take it. There's nothing wrong with people trading.

[fortinbras]

The money laundering charge is for real. NORFED was effectively running a warehouse bank.
Surely you didn't think that all its customers believed that NORFED funny money would someday replace the real stuff.

A good many of them simply read about NORFED's guarantee of a refund in real money (minus some charges for storage, insurance and the like) and sent NORFED their real money in return for the colored paper, which NORFED even titled "Warehouse Receipts". Their assets were hidden from the scrutiny of the IRS, ex-wives, creditors, and the like. At some future date they'd return the warehouse receipts for a refund of real money - they'd even do it piecemeal, as they might need the cash. NORFED's viggorish was simply accepted as a cost of keeping their assets hidden.

[cynicalflyer]

lol the money laundering charge is nonsense. They simply tacked that on because transactions for the purchasing of the bills involved money and the mail and wire fraud is because transactions took place through the mail and wire. The only thing NorFed did was print private currency, that's it, all of the other BS is just that BS.

Actually, the laundering has the most legs, I think. They threaded the neddle to a fair degree on the coinage/utterance stuff. But they most certainly were laundering the money for others. That makes them culpable.

No one was damaged by NorFed, no one filed any charges for being ripped off by him, in fact as far as I can tell no one has made any criminal complaint against him except the DOJ.

Try reading the difference between a crime Malum in se and Malum Prohibitum, then get back to me.

[notorial dissent]

Note to Cynic, please don’t confuse Stevie with latin, he is having a hard enough time with English of the two and three syllable variety.

lol the money laundering charge is nonsense. They simply tacked that on because transactions for the purchasing of the bills involved money and the mail and wire fraud is because transactions took place through the mail and wire. The only thing NorFed did was print private currency, that's it, all of the other BS is just that BS.
Steve, I’m really sincerely curious, just what do you think was going on there that you can’t see the trees for the forest?

They didn’t “simply” tack on the money laundering charge any more than they tacked on any of the other charges they filed. I have no particularly fondness for gov’t I general or any overweening belief in their infallibility, but simple logic dictates that you don’t file charges like money laundering, wire and mail fraud, simply for the fun of it, if only because they have to prove it, and prove it when it comes up for probably cause. Making a fool of yourself in front of a Federal judge or Magistrate and getting caned for it is a sure fire guarantee of not getting far in the DOJ. If they went to that length to file those charges, they have something to back it up, they certainly had enough to get the warrants they got, and probably more than enough to go to a grand jury and eventually to trial with. So they didn’t “simply” tack those charges on, or come up with them either.

No one was damaged by NorFed, no one filed any charges for being ripped off by him, in fact as far as I can tell no one has made any criminal complaint against him except the DOJ. You may think its a ripoff but the bottom line is people liked the currency and they purchased it on their own free will. There's lots of ripoffs out there, and a lot of people waste their money on things we would all agree are stupid ideas, that doesn't make it wrong.
Oh, really!!!! What about the poor schmucks who paid 2-3 times the going rate for a lump of silver, that isn’t even intrinsically worth what they paid for, or the people who were defrauded by it when the idiots tried to pass it? You are saying they didn’t get hurt just because they are too bloody stupid to realize they have been ripped off? Yes, but most people don’t “waste” their money on something that could conceivably get them tossed in the clink for passing counterfeit money.

Now listen very carefully, I am only going to repeat myself once here. I have nothing against the Libby’s in and of themselves, they are artistically and intrinsically-to my mind mediocre crap, but that aside, as collectibles or whatever, they were at best questionable and innocuous. As a side note, if I had had the opportunity, I would have bought the Hawaiian series that Nutbert produced, but not at the price he wanted for them, they were at least historically significant, and actually quite good art in some cases. That didn’t alter the fact, that I was quite aware that they had the appearance of legal tender coins. Mine would have gone into a specimen display and would have remained there.

Von Nutbert was “actively”, let me repeat this for you, “actively” encouraging his gulls to attempt to pass them as currency, regardless of how it was phrased, that is what he was doing, and that is a big NO NO, otherwise known as breaking the law. Why is that such a difficult concept for you?

The Fed didn't and doesn't like competition they want the American people locked in to their fiat currency. This is as big a bit of nonsense as you have come up with in a very long time, even for you. The plain fact of the matter is that the Feds were not/ are not in the least concerned about such a totally nonsensical possibility, because dear Stevie, the majority, nay bulk of all transactions occurring today are of the electronic variety, with currency becoming very rapidly an anachronism. I am convinced that the only mission of the government was to eliminate an alternative currency by making it impossible to do business whether it was illegal or not. You are convinced of this only because you refuse to actually look at what was going on as opposed to what you want it to have been. They knew if they seized all of the bullion NorFed was dead, they didn't even have to prove their lame charges to do it. Nonsnese, they had to prove it first to a judge to get the warrant, and they will have to satisfy a grand jury, and then if it goes to court they will have satisfy both a judge and a jury. I personally wouldn't buy Libby's, but I think people have a right to transact how they please providing people are aware of what they're getting in to and how the transaction will take place. You are quite right people have the right to be as stupid and ignorant as they can possibly manage, but that does not excuse them from the consequences of that stupidity when it finally comes home to roost. Just becuase one individual not associated with NorFed might have tried to pass off the notes as U.S. currency is not the fault of NorFed. Oh, and when NORFED had been actively encouraging just such action, my but the blinders are on. Even in that one instance the clerk never filed charges and as far as I know never actually took the notes. And actually, as usual you were wrong, the grocer who accepted the NORFED was damaged, because as the coin was considered to be legally counterfeit, it was confiscated by the Treasury, and the merchant was not reimbursed for it, so he is out the merchandise. NorFed did not advocate telling people it was U.S. currency, that it was federal money or that is was legal tender. Uh, Stevie, try reading some of Von Nutbert’s original drivel, they actively encouraged people to try and spend it. He did tell people that they should explain what the currency was and try to get more people to take it. There's nothing wrong with people trading.Which doesn’t aloter the fact that it wasn’t worth what they claimed, and legally fit the description of counterfeit money.

[Demosthenes]

From the "How to Use" section of the liberty dollar website.

3. Although prudence would seem to indicate that people would refuse a currency they've never seen, this is simply not the case. After thousands of transactions, the Liberty Dollar is readily accepted most of the time. It is meant to be circulated voluntarily as barter, accumulated and collected.

4. Simply offer The Liberty Dollar with the confidence that it will be accepted. After all, why wouldn't it? When you offer the American Express Card, if it is not accepted, they tell you. Likewise, if the store does not accept Liberty Dollars, the cashier will tell you and you can simply pay another way.

5. "Do the Drop!" The best way to introduce the Liberty Dollar is to drop the Silver Liberty in someone's hand. Do not hand it to the cashier, Drop it! Hold a one-ounce Silver Liberty a couple inches above the outreached palm and drop it so it lands flat in the person's palm.

6. Now the hardest part - don't say anything! Just wait. Let the person marvel at its beauty, weight, and discover it says TWENTY DOLLARS. When asked "Is it real?" Answer: "Yes, one ounce of silver PRIVATE currency valued at 20 dollars." Do not rush. Just stand there and wait, patiently. No need to smile. Just wait.

7. After 30 seconds, say, "I have US government legal tender money too [show the cashier FRN cash], but would prefer to pay with silver." If the cashier hands it back immediately, you may ask her to show the currency to the manager, or just pay some other way.

8. Never use a Silver Liberty alone unless the sale is greater than $10 and less than $20. If the total is greater than $20, include the Silver Libertys with FRNs.

[SteveSy]

They didn’t “simply” tack on the money laundering charge any more than they tacked on any of the other charges they filed. I have no particularly fondness for gov’t I general or any overweening belief in their infallibility, but simple logic dictates that you don’t file charges like money laundering, wire and mail fraud, simply for the fun of it, if only because they have to prove it, and prove it when it comes up for probably cause.

Yes they did, the government does that nonsense all the time. They stack charges based off of a single charge. If that initial charge fails all the rest fall like dominoes. If the government can not prove he violated the currency statute then the government has nothing to support all of the other charges. The government in its complaint provided nothing to show he was involved in mail or wire fraud, or laundering money separate and apart form the currency violation. They're all linked together.

Making a fool of yourself in front of a Federal judge or Magistrate and getting caned for it is a sure fire guarantee of not getting far in the DOJ. If they went to that length to file those charges, they have something to back it up, they certainly had enough to get the warrants they got, and probably more than enough to go to a grand jury and eventually to trial with. So they didn’t “simply” tack those charges on, or come up with them either.

Right, that's why it still hasn't gone to trial. I've read the complaint there's nothing in there to support those other charges except if he violated the currency statute. Read it yourself and point out anything.

Oh, really!!!! What about the poor schmucks who paid 2-3 times the going rate for a lump of silver, that isn’t even intrinsically worth what they paid for, or the people who were defrauded by it when the idiots tried to pass it?

People were never enticed to buy Libbys to invest in precious metals. They purchased the notes and coins for the private currency aspect with the added benefit that the money would always be worth something, because it was backed by precious metals. There was no claim made that the face value of the note or coins would equal the spot price of silver in FRN's.

Why would it, its not an FRN, its $20 of private currency not $20 in FRN's. Does the $20 mark on Canadian money equal $20 in FRN's?

You are saying they didn’t get hurt just because they are too bloody stupid to realize they have been ripped off? Yes, but most people don’t “waste” their money on something that could conceivably get them tossed in the clink for passing counterfeit money.

There was nothing counterfeit about it. It was never sold as legal tender or U.S. currency. In fact you would have to be pretty damn stupid to buy U.S. currency with U.S currency. What would be the point? You were obviously buying something that was not U.S currency otherwise why would you buy it in the first place. They weren't ripped off, no one that purchased the notes and coins has ever claimed they were ripped off. People buy things that aren't worth their market resale value in FRN's all the time. Do you think http://www.911twenty.com/ those contain $20 silver in FRN's? They have "Twenty Dollars" written on them.

Von Nutbert was “actively”, let me repeat this for you, “actively” encouraging his gulls to attempt to pass them as currency, regardless of how it was phrased, that is what he was doing, and that is a big NO NO, otherwise known as breaking the law. Why is that such a difficult concept for you?

Demo posted what they actively encouraged people to do. Notice it says in capital letters to say its private currency. Also, this line destroys your argument and the government's that it was intended to be counterfeit.
"After 30 seconds, say, "I have US government legal tender money too "
Obviously that says very clearly what you are offering is not U.S. currency its something else but you will give them U.S. currency if they want it.

[cynicalflyer]

Yes they did, the government does that nonsense all the time. They stack charges based off of a single charge. If that initial charge fails all the rest fall like dominoes. If the government can not prove he violated the currency statute then the government has nothing to support all of the other charges. The government in its complaint provided nothing to show he was involved in mail or wire fraud, or laundering money separate and apart form the currency violation. They're all linked together.

Um, wha? Money laundering is separate and distinct from the other charges.
And as for what was and was not in the civil complaint, that does not preclude or demonstrate whether they would or would not seek other/additional charges. And yes Steve, they did show the money laundering was separate from the currency violation (i.e. that the bullion was being used to launder the money can be prosecuted separately and in fact could be prosecuted SOLELY).