Liberty Dollar Closes

[SteveSy]

I note in passing the irony of the taxpayers paying for the defense. My guess is that they will use real money.

Considering the government stole millions in gold and silver from the warehouse I don't think the "taxpayers" lost, in fact it was quite profitable to steal all that bullion. The people who bought the gold and silver have lost far more to the government theft than ol' NotHaus could ever ever "over charged" them for. It wasn't even NotHaus's bullion, it belonged to people who legally purchased it but let's not let facts get in the way, right? What's important is that evil NotHaus isn't doing business. So what if a bunch of innocent people were ripped off by the government in the effort of completing that task.

A few months ago I would have agreed with you, however, the dude broke federal law with the gold and silver.

No, there's been no conviction so he hasn't been found guilty of breaking federal law.

"Considering the government seized (stole) millions in automatic weapons from the warehouse I don't think the "taxpayers" lost, in fact it was quite profitable to seize (steal) all those weapons.

Gold and silver isn't illegal to own, automatic weapons are.

The people who bought the weapons have lost far more to the government theft than ol' NotHaus could ever ever "over charged" them for.

At most the receipt is illegal to use as currency, it is not illegal to own. Furthermore, the receipts were purchased legally with FRN's. You know the government accepted "currency".

There is a huge difference here. NotHaus did not own the gold or silver he simply stored it for others and he isn't charged with illegally holding bullion.

Legal gold and silver turned into illegal currency is just as illegal as possessing automatic weapons without the proper licensing to do so. They are both federal offenses. Anyone purchasing such, for illegal purposes, (for use as an alternative 'legal tender') is involved in the illegal enterprise as well.

They didn't just steal minted coins. They took the unminted gold and silver held for redemption by receipt. The government could have a valid argument taking minted coins the equipment to make them and such, not the bullion held for receipt. The bullion isn't illegal. The govenrment could have done the right thing and suggested everyone turn in their receipts to get their gold and silver with a trustee in place or by having Norfed do it under supervision. There was no point whatsoever to steal all that gold and silver from those innocent people.



If you think ANYONE would think that is minted by the U.S. government or that it even remotely resembles a FRN you my friend need to be checked for mental retardation.

[SteveSy]

SteveSy, there is a surfeit of idiots and morons infesting America and a goodly number of them would accept it as cash.

Those same morons would take play money too, should we ban all play money?

Regardless there was no need for the government to take people's gold and silver. NotHaus didn't even own it he was just the storage facility for it. It's not illegal to have a liberty dollar, it's illegal to use it as currency. So no matter how you look at it the government was wrong.

Do you honestly believe the government will return everyone's gold and silver? Not a fricking chance in hell....they stole it under the guise of a bogus seizure.

This is such a pathetic move by the government. The best they have is some guy, not affiliated with NotHaus, "tries", I put emphasis on tries because the money wasn't taken, to buy a CD with a liberty dollar coin and it justifies taking everyone's gold and silver, shutting down the entire operation and imprisoning NotHaus?

That's the fricking best they have? Come on, we've got people like Madoff and Stanford ripping people off for billions without getting caught for years not to mention all of the Mortgage debacle....and they focus on this? More money is lost at your local stop and rob from candy being shoplifted everyday than was lost in this "federal scheme". What a fricking joke..and a total waste of time, money and effort. I take that back the government made a nice profit stealing everyone's bullion.

It just annoys the hell out of me everyone seems to gloss over the fact that the government itself ended up being the true entity responsible for causing serious economic harm. If anything the government is really good at getting people to focus on trivialities while it plunders the public unabated.

[notorial dissent]

WES, I mixed that metaphor intentionally, after all, would you want to walk under a roosting cow, knowing what comes out of roosting critters? And, it was the only way I could really express my opinion of the deep and steaming pile of doo doo that he has placed himself in.

Stevesy, nice to see you are predictable, and wrong as ever.

One of the problems with using a warehouse system, is that the stuff isn’t stashed in nice little packets or bins that say “Joe’s silver” of “Doofuss’s gold”, and when part of the enterprise you are participating in is being used for money laundering, which is the main charge at this point, you tend to have problems claiming your property when it gets seized as part of the criminal activity.

Now I would suspect, not being a lawyer this is just my supposition, that the legitimate marks/suckers should be able to file a claim for their personal property that was part of either the warehouse arrangement, or that they had on order and should be able to get it back, always assuming that it was there to begin with. I would suspect they should be able to file a claim with the court against the corpus of the enterprise for their property, but somehow I suspect a lot of them won’t since that will lead to a lot of embarrassing questions they really don’t want asked or much poked in to.

The other, and more critical problem, that no one has really addressed, is that the warehoused silver/metal/commodities are legally the property of the warehouse, not the certificate holder, and if the warehouse goes bust, it goes to cover the warehouse’s debts first before the remains are distributed to the holders/suckers. Those warehouse certificates are in essence and fact, nothing more than unsecured promissory notes. In this instance I do not foresee a pretty end.

The one positive end of all this will be a forensic accounting of the assets of Liberty, and I don’t expect it to be pretty. Von Nuthouse is too big, and too consistent a liar for him to have kept anything resembling honest books, or even good books for that matter. My gut tells me that there will not be or ever have been sufficient metal to cover either the warehouse receipts or the orders, and so it will be just one more level of the con. My suspicion is that there will have been sufficient money laundering to do serious damage, and insufficient metals to actually cover debt. At this time I have nothing other than my suppositions, but I am quite confident that it will all come out at trial, and it won’t be pretty, petty and sordid, but not pretty.

I actually do feel sympathy for Von Nuthouse’s clients/suckers, they got screwed by him to begin with when they bought his lie, and they are going to get screwed again because he wasn’t honest about his business, and they will most likely get nothing back for what they gave him for his overpriced metal.

[Pottapaug1938]

As a free banking fan, I like the idea of privately minted coins and privately issued currency. But Nuthouse is still a nut. He goal was to fleece dimwitted. His coins were overpriced and of low quality. He tried to play both sides of the fence by claiming his coins were currency to one group and not currency to another.

We tried the idea of privately issued currency before. Google the term "broken bank notes". As for privately minted coins, I shudder to think of all the "coins" that we'd see, "layered" in silver or gold, or perhaps lightweight, clogging up our monetary system. We'd probably wind up with coins like the ones that used to circulate in China. They were tested by the recipient, and then "chopmarked" as a way of stating that the recipient had tested them and found them to be genuine. By the time that these coins circulated to any great extent, they were so chopmarked as to be greatly disfigured. I've seen examples that became bowl-shaped from all the chomarking.

No thanks, to private-issue coins or currency.

[.]

Apparent doper that Von-nutball was (and maybe still is; how does that comport with bail terms?) I doubt very much that he was ever either stoned or stupid enough to fudge the silver content. That would be way too easy to detect, it would take only one determined and suspicious owner but a day or two to get a definitive report from a metallurgist who was given even a single coin to melt and assay.

Can't be too much doubt that there were of lot of launderers buying this junk, so demands for restitution may be minimal. Who knows, the feds may be happy to return a pile of melted-down silver to the estate of the soon-to-be bankrupt LD entity, which will likely never re-open.

The run-of-the-mill suckers will become general creditors, not having specifically identifiable property in the "warehouse," making them subject to whatever Von-nutball's accounting vicissitudes or proclivities to commit fraud happened to be over the last few years. Recovery might be near zero after the BK receiver is paid to unravel the mess.

Things don't look good for them, but it ain't the fault of the feds.

[SteveSy]

WES, I mixed that metaphor intentionally, after all, would you want to walk under a roosting cow, knowing what comes out of roosting critters? And, it was the only way I could really express my opinion of the deep and steaming pile of doo doo that he has placed himself in.

Stevesy, nice to see you are predictable, and wrong as ever.

One of the problems with using a warehouse system, is that the stuff isn’t stashed in nice little packets or bins that say “Joe’s silver” of “Doofuss’s gold”, and when part of the enterprise you are participating in is being used for money laundering, which is the main charge at this point, you tend to have problems claiming your property when it gets seized as part of the criminal activity.

Now I would suspect, not being a lawyer this is just my supposition, that the legitimate marks/suckers should be able to file a claim for their personal property that was part of either the warehouse arrangement, or that they had on order and should be able to get it back, always assuming that it was there to begin with. I would suspect they should be able to file a claim with the court against the corpus of the enterprise for their property, but somehow I suspect a lot of them won’t since that will lead to a lot of embarrassing questions they really don’t want asked or much poked in to.

The other, and more critical problem, that no one has really addressed, is that the warehoused silver/metal/commodities are legally the property of the warehouse, not the certificate holder, and if the warehouse goes bust, it goes to cover the warehouse’s debts first before the remains are distributed to the holders/suckers. Those warehouse certificates are in essence and fact, nothing more than unsecured promissory notes. In this instance I do not foresee a pretty end.

The one positive end of all this will be a forensic accounting of the assets of Liberty, and I don’t expect it to be pretty. Von Nuthouse is too big, and too consistent a liar for him to have kept anything resembling honest books, or even good books for that matter. My gut tells me that there will not be or ever have been sufficient metal to cover either the warehouse receipts or the orders, and so it will be just one more level of the con. My suspicion is that there will have been sufficient money laundering to do serious damage, and insufficient metals to actually cover debt. At this time I have nothing other than my suppositions, but I am quite confident that it will all come out at trial, and it won’t be pretty, petty and sordid, but not pretty.

I actually do feel sympathy for Von Nuthouse’s clients/suckers, they got screwed by him to begin with when they bought his lie, and they are going to get screwed again because he wasn’t honest about his business, and they will most likely get nothing back for what they gave him for his overpriced metal.

Wow all those vile suspicions and not a single piece of evidence to support it. Certainly if any of that even had the hint of truth the government would have made those claims at some point. He is after all the evil Von NotHaus! \

btw, Yes the government did make the claim he's violated the money laundering statute, unfortunately it was only a claim because the government has no evidence of such in the indictment. Everything is predicated on the violation of the currency statute. If the government fails to prove that lame charge the rest of their accusations fall down like a flimsy house of cards.

The government just wanted him out of business and they stole all the gold and silver that represented everyone's warehouse receipt. That's a little closer to the truth.

If the jury gets to hear what "currency" is in the "legal tender" respect and they get to see his web site that clearly and unambiguously states that LD's are the antitheses of FRN's, and are to be publicly stated as such, the government will lose hands down. Only a retarded jury member could conclude Norfed was in the business of counterfeiting or promoting their LD's as government printed or backed money. Of course the government will make certain that none of the jury members have read the constitution or had anything better than an F in history prior to allowing them to serve. So the likelihood of having retarded jury members will be increased significantly. I'm certain the government will also attempt to ban the constitution from the court room.

There is no doubt Norfed issued silver worth less in FRN's than the face value of the money. Of course FRN's have a number printed on them and they aren't backed by anything tangible whatsoever. It was no secret of Norfed and it was made clear and public for all to see. But to claim he was counterfeiting or trying to give the impression his money was issued or backed by the U.S. government is just pathetic. It's not illegal to print money, banks used to do it all the time. In fact the constitution makes it clear the federal government isn't the only entity capable of minting money. What's illegal, and the obvious intent of the statute, is to claim your money is legal tender, in other words backed by the U.S. government. That is what the government is attempting to charge him for, and then concocted a slue of other charges based entirely on that charge sticking.

[cynicalflyer]

Considering the government stole millions in gold and silver from the warehouse I don't think the "taxpayers" lost, in fact it was quite profitable to steal all that bullion.

Uh, not stealing Steve. They legally confiscated it.
Try again.

So what if a bunch of innocent people were ripped off by the government in the effort of completing that task.

They were engaged in a criminal enterprise, Steve. At best the most "innocent" of the lot unknowingly or unwittingly engaged; they may very well recover but even if they do not it is no different than where you purchase stolen property: you take your chances. At worst, the "innocents" were knowingly and actively involved, in which case, to quote the movie Airplane

"they bought their tickets, they knew what they were getting into. I say, let 'em crash."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Bs7EqlLiSs

[Demosthenes]

the government has no evidence of such in the indictment

The indictment is an accusation. Evidence of the crime isn't supposed to be outlined there.

[The Dog]

We tried the idea of privately issued currency before. Google the term "broken bank notes". As for privately minted coins, I shudder to think of all the "coins" that we'd see, "layered" in silver or gold, or perhaps lightweight, clogging up our monetary system. We'd probably wind up with coins like the ones that used to circulate in China. They were tested by the recipient, and then "chopmarked" as a way of stating that the recipient had tested them and found them to be genuine. By the time that these coins circulated to any great extent, they were so chopmarked as to be greatly disfigured. I've seen examples that became bowl-shaped from all the chomarking.

No thanks, to private-issue coins or currency.

We have privately issued banknotes in the UK (in Scotland and Northern Ireland).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banknotes_ ... rn_Ireland

From experience, Scottish banknotes are readily accepted in Scotland and generally in London, but I wouldn't try spending one anywhere else in England except close to the Scottish border. The issue of these notes is of course very tightly controlled.

[cynicalflyer]

Regardless there was no need for the government to take people's gold and silver. NotHaus didn't even own it he was just the storage facility for it. It's not illegal to have a liberty dollar, it's illegal to use it as currency. So no matter how you look at it the government was wrong.

No, because the bullion and other items in question were material elements (literally elements) of the crimes in question and as such evidence. And like all evidence, they may be seized as part of the criminal investigation.

[cynicalflyer]

With the Von Nutty scam coming to a close, the ALD forums are already starting to see the next generation willing to take these marks for all they are worth.

http://www.nabble.com/forum/ViewPost.jt ... 6&framed=y

This one is advertising her "Redemption Method"

by Sue Venable Aug 02, 2009; 05:34pm

I am so sorry for your abuse. Please find out how to defend yourself, if
you do not already know. http://www.moneyonaccount.com

But there remain some diehards. This seems like a really, really stupid idea.

http://www.nabble.com/11th-Anniversary- ... 89218.html

11th Anniversary for Liberty Dollar

by javasdad2 Aug 02, 2009; 11:08pm

In the news letter Bernard was asking for ideas on how we might commemorate 11 years. I was wondering how the members here felt about an organized march on our capitol. Nations capitol and or state capitols depending on where you and yours are financially.

My idea was to make the march in handcuffs as Americans we are not free but rather indentured servants. The distance of the march would not be as important as the number of marchers. If we were able to show strong support it may gain the medias attention and at the very least raise national awareness.

[SteveSy]

Considering the government stole millions in gold and silver from the warehouse I don't think the "taxpayers" lost, in fact it was quite profitable to steal all that bullion.

Uh, not stealing Steve. They legally confiscated it.
Try again.

The german government legally confiscated all the money, silver and gold of people back in the 30's. People still to this day consider it theft. Just because the government takes it doesn't make it any less theft when it shouldn't have taken it.

So what if a bunch of innocent people were ripped off by the government in the effort of completing that task.

They were engaged in a criminal enterprise, Steve. At best the most "innocent" of the lot unknowingly or unwittingly engaged; they may very well recover but even if they do not it is no different than where you purchase stolen property: you take your chances. At worst, the "innocents" were knowingly and actively involved, in which case, to quote the movie Airplane

Criminal enterprise...hahahaha!

What because a bunch of people wanted to trade gold and silver coins for products and services instead of a piece of paper backed by nothing except the forced confiscation of wealth of our children and grand children sanctioned by the federal government? I realize keeping that scheme intact is of utmost importance to you. I think you've identified the wrong "criminal enterprise" sir.

Whatever....

[The Observer]

Criminal enterprise...hahahaha!

What because a bunch of people wanted to trade gold and silver coins for products and services instead of a piece of paper backed by nothing except the forced confiscation of wealth of our children and grand children sanctioned by the federal government? I think you've identified the wrong "criminal enterprise" sir.

Whatever....

But that isn't what was happening, Steve, and you know it. NotHaus specifically stated in his newsletter that his customers should attempt to circulate the Libbies as a substitute for legal currency and imply to merchants that the "face value" was equivalent to the same value of legal currency.

[SteveSy]

Criminal enterprise...hahahaha!

What because a bunch of people wanted to trade gold and silver coins for products and services instead of a piece of paper backed by nothing except the forced confiscation of wealth of our children and grand children sanctioned by the federal government? I think you've identified the wrong "criminal enterprise" sir.

Whatever....

But that isn't what was happening, Steve, and you know it. NotHaus specifically stated in his newsletter that his customers should attempt to circulate the Libbies as a substitute for legal currency and imply to merchants that the "face value" was equivalent to the same value of legal currency.

Banks used to do that all the time...it's not illegal to print money. What's illegal is to claim your money is backed by the U.S. government. In fact banks do it today without the approval of congress, it's just in digital form. More importantly the constitution makes it clear the federal government isn't the only entity that can mint money.

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

The government can regulate it's own money and punish people for attempting to duplicate its money but it can not claim it has the authority to be the sole issuer of coins. Clearly the following makes that clear.

No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.

[cynicalflyer]

The german government legally confiscated all the money, silver and gold of people back in the 30's.

And here we see Godwin's Law in action and a Reductio ad Hitlerum to boot.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_Hitlerum

Criminal enterprise...hahahaha!

Yes, Steve. Read the indictment.

[Pottapaug1938]

We tried the idea of privately issued currency before. Google the term "broken bank notes". As for privately minted coins, I shudder to think of all the "coins" that we'd see, "layered" in silver or gold, or perhaps lightweight, clogging up our monetary system. We'd probably wind up with coins like the ones that used to circulate in China. They were tested by the recipient, and then "chopmarked" as a way of stating that the recipient had tested them and found them to be genuine. By the time that these coins circulated to any great extent, they were so chopmarked as to be greatly disfigured. I've seen examples that became bowl-shaped from all the chomarking.

No thanks, to private-issue coins or currency.

We have privately issued banknotes in the UK (in Scotland and Northern Ireland).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banknotes_ ... rn_Ireland

From experience, Scottish banknotes are readily accepted in Scotland and generally in London, but I wouldn't try spending one anywhere else in England except close to the Scottish border. The issue of these notes is of course very tightly controlled.

I know -- I've used each; and found the use of Scottish notes to be just as you said (and found that asking for Scottish pounds at a bank during a currency exchange made me friends). We actually had something similar, years ago, called "National Currency", but those have not been around in years. Still, given the recent financial scandals involving banks, here in the US, I wouldn't be too happy about allowing banks to resume issuing their own currency.

SteveSy -- you ought to take another look at the Constitution. Article I, Section 10 prohibits the states from coining money. Article I, Section 8, specifies that Congress shall have power to... coin money, and regulate the value thereof.

[SteveSy]

Criminal enterprise...hahahaha!

Yes, Steve. Read the indictment.

I have the indictment....the government is attempting to claim they and only they can coin money. The constitution says otherwise. More importantly banks issued money for years prior to federal control. I guess the federal courts just overlooked that glaring violation for over a century?

The indictment is weak and pathetic. Again, the entire thing is a house of cards specifically built upon one charge of violating the legal tender statute. If that charge fails all of the rest fail.

http://www.fraudsandscams.com/Nothaus/Indictment.pdf

btw, Goodwins law doesn't apply...I'm not comparing the government to Hitler. I'm simply saying a government can make any confiscation legal under its own authority. Doesn't make it any less theft to anyone else when it was done wrongly. If the simple fact that a government declares it legal makes it not theft then it wasn't theft in the 30's.

[Imalawman]

I'm simply saying a government can make any confiscation legal under its own authority. Doesn't make it any less theft to anyone else when it was done wrongly. If the simple fact that a government declares it legal makes it not theft then it wasn't theft in the 30's.

Well, actually, yes, if the government through enacted laws declares something as theft that was not theft before, then it is still going to be theft currently. Now, you maybe correct is stating that it is morally right or wrong - but that is different than looking at it from a legal standpoint.

[SteveSy]

I'm simply saying a government can make any confiscation legal under its own authority. Doesn't make it any less theft to anyone else when it was done wrongly. If the simple fact that a government declares it legal makes it not theft then it wasn't theft in the 30's.

Well, actually, yes, if the government through enacted laws declares something as theft that was not theft before, then it is still going to be theft currently. Now, you maybe correct is stating that it is morally right or wrong - but that is different than looking at it from a legal standpoint.

I'm not talking about it in a legal standpoint...that's absurd considering the government is the one making the laws and the one making the confiscation. Again, if the simple fact that a government makes a law declaring it legal to confiscate property makes it not theft then it wasn't theft in the 30's. In fact no government no matter how tyrannical is committing theft or any other legally defined act if it makes a law saying otherwise if that's the case.

Let's just chalk this one up as another logically fallacy where the assumption of the premise is used to support the conclusion or a case of circular reasoning.

[Pottapaug1938]

SteveSy -- can you provide any more documentation for your assertion that the German government legally confiscated all the money, silver and gold, back in the 1930s? I'm pretty familiar with German history, and I don't remember anything of the sort. Having dates, names of the relevant laws (and, even better, the texts of the laws) would help.

And, remember that the term I'm looking for is confiscation. A law ordering that hoards of gold or silver be sold to the government isn't confiscation.