Unregistered
Moderator
---
FBI Raids Liberty Dollar – Confiscates All Ron Paul Dollar
- Thread starter cloverleaf762
- Start date
- Status
The OP himself stated that Ron Paul "agreed to it." And I believe him. Alternatively, Ron Paul put on blinders and ignored the fact that his name and face were being used in the scheme, which is just as bad. This is the kind of judgment being exercised by someone who wants to the President of the United States?!? If a looney group trying to defraud people had used any other candidates' faces and names as part of its scheme, you can bet that every one of them would taken legal action to prevent it. Or at least return the campaign contributions from the looney group. But not Ron Paul. 
I encourage all of you to review the Affidavit. It specifically refers to Nuthouse's instructions about how to pass off the FAKE Ron Paul dollars as legal tender by using the "drop" method. It specifically states how Nuthouses' organization lacked sufficient amounts of real precious metals to back up investments. It specifically refers to how the FAKE Ron Paul dollars are designed to appear to be legal US tender. It specifically states how Nuthouse manipulated the prices of the FAKE Ron Paul currency.
P.S. I laughed when I saw the part of the Affidavit that stated that Nuthouse had established a legal defense fund for himself, and had requsted donations in the form of genuine US dollars.
Apparently, Nuthouses' lawyers won't accept the FAKE Ron Paul dollars for their retainer.
I encourage all of you to review the Affidavit. It specifically refers to Nuthouse's instructions about how to pass off the FAKE Ron Paul dollars as legal tender by using the "drop" method. It specifically states how Nuthouses' organization lacked sufficient amounts of real precious metals to back up investments. It specifically refers to how the FAKE Ron Paul dollars are designed to appear to be legal US tender. It specifically states how Nuthouse manipulated the prices of the FAKE Ron Paul currency.
P.S. I laughed when I saw the part of the Affidavit that stated that Nuthouse had established a legal defense fund for himself, and had requsted donations in the form of genuine US dollars.
Apparently, Nuthouses' lawyers won't accept the FAKE Ron Paul dollars for their retainer.
Last edited:
After laboriously reading this entire thread, I have a few thoughts:
Nobody, I repeat NOBODY, knew all the facts behind this entire story BEFORE they started immediately criticizing von Nothaus. Misconceptions and falsehoods abounded for the first four pages. It's astounding how much ignorance was displayed. For example, on Glenn Beck tonight Bernard von Nothaus declared that Ron Paul did NOT know about the Ron Paul dollar. How many of you blurted out that he had knowledge and had legitimized it? And you knew this based on what source?
I've read the affidavit and all the search warrants. I doubt that most of you who posted negatively did so or will do so. That is irresponsible and ignorant. It's people like this who give the blogosphere a bad rep. You know the saying, "Opinions are like <blank blanks>..."
If this had been a gun maker who was suing the BATFE for the right to manufacture a new gun which hadn't been declared illegal, and the BATFE had, in response to a legal setback in said lawsuit, openly and blatantly raided and seized everything that business owned WITHOUT arresting anybody, the people on this site would have been up in arms. I guess you won't get angry until they do get around to something that you care about personally, eh?
Are any of you aware that there are hundreds if not thousands of people who had standing orders that were about to be fulfilled and now cannot be due to the confiscation of Liberty's property?
Why are Amero Dollars, Disney Dollars, and all gift certificates and gift cards that are sold online not confiscated as well? These are, after all, circulated and represented and used as LEGAL TENDER, are they not?
Nobody, I repeat NOBODY, knew all the facts behind this entire story BEFORE they started immediately criticizing von Nothaus. Misconceptions and falsehoods abounded for the first four pages. It's astounding how much ignorance was displayed. For example, on Glenn Beck tonight Bernard von Nothaus declared that Ron Paul did NOT know about the Ron Paul dollar. How many of you blurted out that he had knowledge and had legitimized it? And you knew this based on what source?
I've read the affidavit and all the search warrants. I doubt that most of you who posted negatively did so or will do so. That is irresponsible and ignorant. It's people like this who give the blogosphere a bad rep. You know the saying, "Opinions are like <blank blanks>..."
If this had been a gun maker who was suing the BATFE for the right to manufacture a new gun which hadn't been declared illegal, and the BATFE had, in response to a legal setback in said lawsuit, openly and blatantly raided and seized everything that business owned WITHOUT arresting anybody, the people on this site would have been up in arms. I guess you won't get angry until they do get around to something that you care about personally, eh?
Are any of you aware that there are hundreds if not thousands of people who had standing orders that were about to be fulfilled and now cannot be due to the confiscation of Liberty's property?
Why are Amero Dollars, Disney Dollars, and all gift certificates and gift cards that are sold online not confiscated as well? These are, after all, circulated and represented and used as LEGAL TENDER, are they not?
DonR101395
New member
No they aren't. Disney sells disney dollars that are good at disney. You know, they are like gift certificates, they don't give you instructions about how to pass disney dollars at walmart.
The amero
Also the website selling these makes no claim about them being legal tender.
Disney dollars are not circulated as cash. Disney Dollars can only be used at Disney and I am sure have a disclaimer on them that states no cash value, much like coupons and such. You can go to Chuck e cheese and get coins for the games there, the games only take chuck e cheese coins but you can't spend them any where else.
The continued comparrisons of Disney Dollars and such to Ron Paul liberty Dollars is absurd, it is like comparing apples to oranges.
Just because no arrests have been made YET, does not mean the government doesn't have a case. THis is not going to hurt Ron Pauls chances for the Republican nomination because quite simply he had no chance to begin with.
Passing a coin off that states 20 dollars on it when it is really worth 15 dollars is a problem IMHO.
The continued comparrisons of Disney Dollars and such to Ron Paul liberty Dollars is absurd, it is like comparing apples to oranges.
Just because no arrests have been made YET, does not mean the government doesn't have a case. THis is not going to hurt Ron Pauls chances for the Republican nomination because quite simply he had no chance to begin with.
Passing a coin off that states 20 dollars on it when it is really worth 15 dollars is a problem IMHO.
Fremmer.
The man mints what you decree as FAKE money, designed to DEFRAUD the people, and you imply his dishonesty in every one of your posts, yet you BELIEVE him? Please for the sake of anyone taking you seriously take a stand one way or another on this man's integrity.
Also, "I believe him" is not a citation of fact. That's what is needed here to carry on the debate.
Name calling doesn't really help either, just makes you look like a (your word) looney. It has no place in intelligent discourse, no matter which side of the debate you're on. That applies to all the others here who've said it as well.
There is quite a difference between "not legal tender" and "FAKE". They were made of appropriate amounts of precious metal that could legally be traded on specie/commodity markets. That is not FAKE. They were not legal tender, to be sure, but certainly not valueless or false. In addition, although they took inspiration from several forms of legal tender currency, the fact that they did not copy any specific peice means it's neither counterfiet nor forgery, either.
Based on these comments and other posts you've made in this thread, it appears your issue is more with Ron Paul himself than the coins or their maker, which are the topics of the thread.
Leave the Paul-hating for another thread and stick to the topic. That is Mr. NUTHOUSE, the coins he made, and the trouble he may be in. That applies to all of us. There are plenty of other Paul threads if you want to go bash the man.
I'm not trying to be an arse at all, but this thread has veered of topic, and people are beginning to act childish. Let's all rein it in and not look like ranting "looneys" to the general public. Mmmmmkay?
BTW, thanks for the word looney. Hadn't heard it in a while. It may be tomorrow's "word of the day".
The man mints what you decree as FAKE money, designed to DEFRAUD the people, and you imply his dishonesty in every one of your posts, yet you BELIEVE him? Please for the sake of anyone taking you seriously take a stand one way or another on this man's integrity.
Also, "I believe him" is not a citation of fact. That's what is needed here to carry on the debate.
Name calling doesn't really help either, just makes you look like a (your word) looney. It has no place in intelligent discourse, no matter which side of the debate you're on. That applies to all the others here who've said it as well.
There is quite a difference between "not legal tender" and "FAKE". They were made of appropriate amounts of precious metal that could legally be traded on specie/commodity markets. That is not FAKE. They were not legal tender, to be sure, but certainly not valueless or false. In addition, although they took inspiration from several forms of legal tender currency, the fact that they did not copy any specific peice means it's neither counterfiet nor forgery, either.
Based on these comments and other posts you've made in this thread, it appears your issue is more with Ron Paul himself than the coins or their maker, which are the topics of the thread.
Leave the Paul-hating for another thread and stick to the topic. That is Mr. NUTHOUSE
, the coins he made, and the trouble he may be in. That applies to all of us. There are plenty of other Paul threads if you want to go bash the man.I'm not trying to be an arse at all, but this thread has veered of topic, and people are beginning to act childish. Let's all rein it in and not look like ranting "looneys" to the general public. Mmmmmkay?
BTW, thanks for the word looney. Hadn't heard it in a while. It may be tomorrow's "word of the day".
You can get silver for today's spot price of ~$14.50 an ounce if you show up with about $7,500 in cash to spend on a 500-ounce ingot of silver in New York City first thing tomorrow morning.
That's what the "spot" price is.
You are basically asserting that manufacturing and minting has no cost or value, and that a PCGS MS69 should be priced the same as a PR69DCAM, which should be priced the same as an ounce of the blobs of silver scraped off a jeweler's bench.
More specifically:
Or consider this glorious specimen of the minter's art.
That's what the "spot" price is.
You are basically asserting that manufacturing and minting has no cost or value, and that a PCGS MS69 should be priced the same as a PR69DCAM, which should be priced the same as an ounce of the blobs of silver scraped off a jeweler's bench.
More specifically:
Or consider this glorious specimen of the minter's art.
Unregistered
Moderator
It is interesting that the neo-cons in the Republican party have turned all their frustration on Ron Paul. The Republican Party is sinking because of failed neo-con policies. They have lost the House and Senate, and are on the verge of losing the Presidency next year.
Rather than fixing their own house, and then competing against their true enemies, the Democrats, the Republicans have become focused on discrediting Ron Paul, a man who is polling in single digits and poses no threat to the status quo. They will blame him for losing in 2008, even if he doesnt run on a third party ticket. I will predict that the neo-cons, when they lose in 2008, will say its because Ron Paul supporters boycotted the election.
I would encourage Republicans and conservatives to be less divisive as a party, quit spending so much time arguing over phantom candidates, reform their platform to one of true conservatism, and then focus on the true task at han: defeating the Democrats. If the party fails to do this, then you can be assured the Democrats will win and have complete control of Washington.
Rather than fixing their own house, and then competing against their true enemies, the Democrats, the Republicans have become focused on discrediting Ron Paul, a man who is polling in single digits and poses no threat to the status quo. They will blame him for losing in 2008, even if he doesnt run on a third party ticket. I will predict that the neo-cons, when they lose in 2008, will say its because Ron Paul supporters boycotted the election.
I would encourage Republicans and conservatives to be less divisive as a party, quit spending so much time arguing over phantom candidates, reform their platform to one of true conservatism, and then focus on the true task at han: defeating the Democrats. If the party fails to do this, then you can be assured the Democrats will win and have complete control of Washington.
DonR101395
New member
And a lot of folks "who were gonna show them republicans" are now scratching their heads wondering what happened when the utopia they were promised from the dems failed to materialize.
I can't speak for anyone but myself. I don't hate the guy, I just can't see him being an option for me since he hasn't accomplished a whole lot thus far in his career as a legislator. Voting on hopes and promises means nothing without a history of performance and he doesn't have it. IMHO
Unregistered
Moderator
I don't think many people were expecting Utopia. In fact, I don't think the Democrats have done much of anything bad since they took over the House and Senate. If anything we are better off, as most of the neo-conservative Bush agenda has been stymied. I don't relish the idea of them winning the presidency though, as this would give them complete control in Washington, and I am sure they could foul things up at least as badly as the Republicans did when they had complete control.
DonR101395
New member
She wouldn't get my vote for President of the United States either
DonR101395
New member
My point being many people voted for them on a hope and promise of pulling out of Iraq, not only are we still there, they continue to fund it which was another of the promises they said they wouldn't do, but once in office they crawfished on it. Health care reform, didn't happen, welfare reform, didn't happen, social security reform, I think you got the idea.
Unregistered
Moderator
Yes, but I don't think you are getting my point. The people who voted for Democrats didn't care about the Democrats plans as much as they just wanted the Republicans out of control.
Everything bad that happened during the Bush administration happened before the Democrats took control of the Congress. By bad, I am talking about Medicare Reform, No child left behind, Campaign Finance Reform, Patriot Act, Military Commissions Act, etc.
Everything bad that happened during the Bush administration happened before the Democrats took control of the Congress. By bad, I am talking about Medicare Reform, No child left behind, Campaign Finance Reform, Patriot Act, Military Commissions Act, etc.
DonR101395
New member
I understand that, I just don't have any confidence in converting people who would vote with that much carelessness. Do they really care about Ron Paul or any other candidate? I don't think so, they care about the easiest road to travel, not research. I could be wrong, it wouldn't be the first time.
The central question has yet to be asked and debated:
What, exactly, does Title 18 USC ss 486 mean?
That's the central dispute between Nothaus and the treasury. The feds don't seem to want to take this to court to find out.
And if it means what they say it means, is it unconstitutional?
Nothaus' argument from his lawsuit against the treasury:
Judging by their actions, Nothaus is much more confident of the outcome than the feds, but that doesn't mean he's right. What will a judge say?
Lawyers?
What, exactly, does Title 18 USC ss 486 mean?
That's the central dispute between Nothaus and the treasury. The feds don't seem to want to take this to court to find out.
And if it means what they say it means, is it unconstitutional?
Nothaus' argument from his lawsuit against the treasury:
Judging by their actions, Nothaus is much more confident of the outcome than the feds, but that doesn't mean he's right. What will a judge say?
Lawyers?
cloverleaf762
New member
To that end a criminal charge might do him good. Beyond a shadow of a doubt is harder for the government to get than for Bernard to show preponderance of the evidence. This action by the feds really increase his chance of winning, but with major inconvenience in the interim.
- Status