The EU-US deal restores stability and predictability for citizens and businesses on both sides of the Atlantic.

It secures continued access for EU exports to the US market, preserving deeply integrated value chains and safeguarding jobs. It provides the basis for continued collaboration.

The deal sets out the parameters of the EU-US trade relationship. It is the first step in a process that will be further expanded over time to cover additional areas and continue to improve market access.

@EUCommission

Incredible!

It's ridiculous how you are posting this nonsense for the third time (!) today, desperately trying to sell your surrender and submission to a bully as success.

You have encouraged the orange man to use his strategy again, whenever and wherever he wants to, because he can rely on you to bend over again, ready to be screwed again and again.

And you have turned yourself into a clown by now, trying to hammer home silly, delusional messages while everybody can see how abysmally you've failed.

Please, stop this. You are embarrassing. What happened is humiliating enough for European citizens already, stop making it even worse by exposing us further as a laughing stock.

#USpol#EUpol

There is really no comparison in American history to the blatant corruption.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/29/opinion/trump-crypto-genius-act-memcoin.html

#crypto #cryptocurrency#USpol#USpolitics

Molly White, whose Citation Needed newsletter I mentioned above, shares Massad’s views, writing by email:
Trump has made hundreds of millions of dollars from hawking a memecoin — that is, a crypto token that doesn’t even try to pretend to have some underlying value or purpose — to his followers and to those hoping to buy influence with the president.
There is really no comparison in American history to the blatant corruption of Trump’s pay-for-access memecoin dinner, where hundreds of primarily foreign nationals spent anywhere from $55,000 to more than $37 million for a ticket to the event.
The crypto billionaire Justin Sun was the top memecoin holder at the dinner, and earlier this month announced he plans to buy another $100 million $TRUMP.
Molly White, whose Citation Needed newsletter I mentioned above, shares Massad’s views, writing by email: Trump has made hundreds of millions of dollars from hawking a memecoin — that is, a crypto token that doesn’t even try to pretend to have some underlying value or purpose — to his followers and to those hoping to buy influence with the president. There is really no comparison in American history to the blatant corruption of Trump’s pay-for-access memecoin dinner, where hundreds of primarily foreign nationals spent anywhere from $55,000 to more than $37 million for a ticket to the event. The crypto billionaire Justin Sun was the top memecoin holder at the dinner, and earlier this month announced he plans to buy another $100 million $TRUMP.

We should live in a world where selling out to corporate money or being completely spineless and ineffective in office is what threatens re-election.

#crypto #cryptocurrency#USpol#USpolitics

There is really no comparison in American history to the blatant corruption.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/29/opinion/trump-crypto-genius-act-memcoin.html

#crypto #cryptocurrency#USpol#USpolitics

Molly White, whose Citation Needed newsletter I mentioned above, shares Massad’s views, writing by email:
Trump has made hundreds of millions of dollars from hawking a memecoin — that is, a crypto token that doesn’t even try to pretend to have some underlying value or purpose — to his followers and to those hoping to buy influence with the president.
There is really no comparison in American history to the blatant corruption of Trump’s pay-for-access memecoin dinner, where hundreds of primarily foreign nationals spent anywhere from $55,000 to more than $37 million for a ticket to the event.
The crypto billionaire Justin Sun was the top memecoin holder at the dinner, and earlier this month announced he plans to buy another $100 million $TRUMP.
Molly White, whose Citation Needed newsletter I mentioned above, shares Massad’s views, writing by email: Trump has made hundreds of millions of dollars from hawking a memecoin — that is, a crypto token that doesn’t even try to pretend to have some underlying value or purpose — to his followers and to those hoping to buy influence with the president. There is really no comparison in American history to the blatant corruption of Trump’s pay-for-access memecoin dinner, where hundreds of primarily foreign nationals spent anywhere from $55,000 to more than $37 million for a ticket to the event. The crypto billionaire Justin Sun was the top memecoin holder at the dinner, and earlier this month announced he plans to buy another $100 million $TRUMP.

The prosecution's flailing attempts to navigate around the Blanche memo exemplify the incoherence of the Trump administration's approach to cryptocurrency enforcement: carveouts for powerful allies while continuing aggressive prosecutions to avoid appearing soft on cybercrime.

#crypto #cryptocurrency#USpol#USpolitics

The prosecution’s flailing attempts to navigate around the Blanche memo exemplify the incoherence of the Trump administration’s approach to cryptocurrency enforcement: sweeping regulatory rollbacks that primarily benefit wealthy crypto operators, while simultaneously pushing ahead with aggressive prosecutions of developers like Storm to avoid the appearance of being soft on North Korea or cybercrime more broadly. The result is a prosecution that must somehow prove that Storm failed to implement specific compliance controls, without being able to point to any regulations outlining these controls that he supposedly failed to follow.

With their legal theory in shambles, prosecutors have resorted to tenuous guilt-by-association arguments and mischaracterized evidence. They’ve tried to hold Storm responsible for scams that may not have even touched Tornado Cash, argued that he should be culpable for not helping scam victims in ways that would not have been technically possible, and building a case for intent around chat messages that turned out to be forwarded news inquiries rather than evidence of criminal conspiracy. What remains is less a coherent prosecution than a cautionary tale about the dangers of letting political imperatives drive criminal cases.
The prosecution’s flailing attempts to navigate around the Blanche memo exemplify the incoherence of the Trump administration’s approach to cryptocurrency enforcement: sweeping regulatory rollbacks that primarily benefit wealthy crypto operators, while simultaneously pushing ahead with aggressive prosecutions of developers like Storm to avoid the appearance of being soft on North Korea or cybercrime more broadly. The result is a prosecution that must somehow prove that Storm failed to implement specific compliance controls, without being able to point to any regulations outlining these controls that he supposedly failed to follow. With their legal theory in shambles, prosecutors have resorted to tenuous guilt-by-association arguments and mischaracterized evidence. They’ve tried to hold Storm responsible for scams that may not have even touched Tornado Cash, argued that he should be culpable for not helping scam victims in ways that would not have been technically possible, and building a case for intent around chat messages that turned out to be forwarded news inquiries rather than evidence of criminal conspiracy. What remains is less a coherent prosecution than a cautionary tale about the dangers of letting political imperatives drive criminal cases.

But shortly after this testimony, crypto sleuths discovered that the scam victim’s funds likely never were laundered through Tornado Cash at all.

Not only that, the “crypto recovery” service used by the victim may have been one identified by the FBI as a scam known for producing “incomplete or inaccurate tracing report[s]” (though this may be a separate company sharing a name, or impersonating a legitimate business).

#crypto #cryptocurrency#USpol#USpolitics

September 11, 2024
FBI San Diego Seizes Cryptocurrency Recovery Websites
SAN DIEGO — Special Agents with the FBI San Diego Field Office have seized websites belonging to three cryptocurrency recovery services. The seizures come as the FBI continues to crack down on an emerging scam tactic aimed at further defrauding cryptocurrency scam victims.

The web domains were from the following cryptocurrency recovery services: MyChargeBack, Payback LTD, and Claim Justice. These companies claim to provide cryptocurrency tracing and promise the ability to recover lost funds. Representatives of these companies often advertise strong success in recovering victim funds but have no track record in doing so. They often charge significant upfront fees and ask for a commission should funds be recovered. These companies use extensive social media advertising, including false reviews, to convince victims of the legitimacy of their services.

Potential ways to identify this type of scheme:

Recovery scheme fraudsters charge an up-front fee and either cease communication with the victim after receiving an initial deposit or produce an incomplete or inaccurate tracing report. They may also request additional fees to recover funds.
Fraudsters may claim affiliation with law enforcement or legal services to appear legitimate.
Scammers may reference actual financial institutions and money exchanges to build credibility and further their schemes.
Tips to avoid becoming a victim:
September 11, 2024 FBI San Diego Seizes Cryptocurrency Recovery Websites SAN DIEGO — Special Agents with the FBI San Diego Field Office have seized websites belonging to three cryptocurrency recovery services. The seizures come as the FBI continues to crack down on an emerging scam tactic aimed at further defrauding cryptocurrency scam victims. The web domains were from the following cryptocurrency recovery services: MyChargeBack, Payback LTD, and Claim Justice. These companies claim to provide cryptocurrency tracing and promise the ability to recover lost funds. Representatives of these companies often advertise strong success in recovering victim funds but have no track record in doing so. They often charge significant upfront fees and ask for a commission should funds be recovered. These companies use extensive social media advertising, including false reviews, to convince victims of the legitimacy of their services. Potential ways to identify this type of scheme: Recovery scheme fraudsters charge an up-front fee and either cease communication with the victim after receiving an initial deposit or produce an incomplete or inaccurate tracing report. They may also request additional fees to recover funds. Fraudsters may claim affiliation with law enforcement or legal services to appear legitimate. Scammers may reference actual financial institutions and money exchanges to build credibility and further their schemes. Tips to avoid becoming a victim:
Worse still, Payback may well have been one of three companies named in a September 2024 press release from the San Diego FBI office announcing the seizure of websites connected to scam crypto recovery services — although it is possible that the firm Lin used merely shares a name with a scam service.9 According to the FBI: “These companies claim to provide cryptocurrency tracing and promise the ability to recover lost funds. Representatives of these companies often advertise strong success in recovering victim funds but have no track record in doing so. They often charge significant upfront fees and ask for a commission should funds be recovered.” In other words, the prosecutors may have chosen a scam victim to put on the stand based solely on claims from a crypto “recovery” service the FBI has specifically named as charging fees to “produce an incomplete or inaccurate tracing report”.10
Worse still, Payback may well have been one of three companies named in a September 2024 press release from the San Diego FBI office announcing the seizure of websites connected to scam crypto recovery services — although it is possible that the firm Lin used merely shares a name with a scam service.9 According to the FBI: “These companies claim to provide cryptocurrency tracing and promise the ability to recover lost funds. Representatives of these companies often advertise strong success in recovering victim funds but have no track record in doing so. They often charge significant upfront fees and ask for a commission should funds be recovered.” In other words, the prosecutors may have chosen a scam victim to put on the stand based solely on claims from a crypto “recovery” service the FBI has specifically named as charging fees to “produce an incomplete or inaccurate tracing report”.10
This all sounds very heartwrenching, but there was one slight issue, apparently first noticed by crypto sleuth Taylor Monahan as she followed the trial coverage: the money stolen from Lin may never have gone to Tornado Cash at all. Monahan said her interest was initially drawn based on her experience tracing transfers from thousands of victims like Lin. “Those scammers don’t use Tornado Cash ... and they never have,” she wrote, explaining that “it’s nothing compared to their existing laundry networks” that can launder massive sums.7

Although no transaction details were mentioned in Lin’s testimony, Monahan was able to track down the transactions between Lin and the scammers from separate court cases involving seizures of funds from the same scam group. She repeated the tracing supposedly performed by Payback, discovering that no transfers ever went to Tornado Cash or to Coinbase, and that Payback apparently made an incredibly rookie mistake: by mishandling tracing of a chainswap transaction that batches together many unrelated deposits, they may have erroneously identified completely unrelated transfers to Coinbase and Tornado Cash as made by Lin’s scammer. Fellow crypto sleuth zachxbt later wrote that he’d repeated Monahan’s analysis and agreed with it, writing: “Idk how you mess up the tracing that bad ... It’s unfortunate these predatory firms come up as the first search results on Google when victims look for help.”8
This all sounds very heartwrenching, but there was one slight issue, apparently first noticed by crypto sleuth Taylor Monahan as she followed the trial coverage: the money stolen from Lin may never have gone to Tornado Cash at all. Monahan said her interest was initially drawn based on her experience tracing transfers from thousands of victims like Lin. “Those scammers don’t use Tornado Cash ... and they never have,” she wrote, explaining that “it’s nothing compared to their existing laundry networks” that can launder massive sums.7 Although no transaction details were mentioned in Lin’s testimony, Monahan was able to track down the transactions between Lin and the scammers from separate court cases involving seizures of funds from the same scam group. She repeated the tracing supposedly performed by Payback, discovering that no transfers ever went to Tornado Cash or to Coinbase, and that Payback apparently made an incredibly rookie mistake: by mishandling tracing of a chainswap transaction that batches together many unrelated deposits, they may have erroneously identified completely unrelated transfers to Coinbase and Tornado Cash as made by Lin’s scammer. Fellow crypto sleuth zachxbt later wrote that he’d repeated Monahan’s analysis and agreed with it, writing: “Idk how you mess up the tracing that bad ... It’s unfortunate these predatory firms come up as the first search results on Google when victims look for help.”8

Prosecutors have tried to recover the testimony by bringing in an FBI agent to testify that the scam victim’s funds were sent to Tornado, using an accounting practice known as LIFO. Problem is, that doesn’t really work for crypto tracing — as the agent acknowledged.

#crypto #cryptocurrency#USpol#USpolitics

Now, this is admittedly a simplified example. A real money corner store money transfer service is required to register and abide by strict regulations as a money transmitting business, including keeping detailed records on who sent money where. Yet these are exactly the compliance measures that prosecutors, following the Blanche memo, can no longer argue Storm was required to implement.

When asked during cross-examination, “This doesn’t prove that the hacker moved [Lin’s] money into Tornado Cash, does it?” the agent replied “No, not at all.”11
Now, this is admittedly a simplified example. A real money corner store money transfer service is required to register and abide by strict regulations as a money transmitting business, including keeping detailed records on who sent money where. Yet these are exactly the compliance measures that prosecutors, following the Blanche memo, can no longer argue Storm was required to implement. When asked during cross-examination, “This doesn’t prove that the hacker moved [Lin’s] money into Tornado Cash, does it?” the agent replied “No, not at all.”11
In an attempt to save the situation, the prosecution called in an IRS agent to testify that, using an accounting method called LIFO (“last in, first out”), one could argue Lin’s stolen funds did indeed go to Tornado Cash. While LIFO makes sense in some circumstances, such as its common application by businesses accounting for their inventory, it’s a poor choice in this situation. Essentially, the agent testified that, if you assume that the last funds into a wallet are the also the first funds to be withdrawn, it can be established that the scammer’s deposit into the chainswap service went to Tornado Cash.

Let’s use an overly simplistic example to illustrate the problem here. Let’s say you have $1,000 you want to move from one of your bank accounts to another bank account. For whatever reason, you decide the best way to do this is to walk to the corner shop and have them make a money transfer for you. The guy at the counter takes down your account information, puts it on a pile next to him, and you go about your day. Behind you in line, some other person is planning to send $1,000 to an illegal arms dealer. She gives that account information to the guy at the counter, and on the stack it goes. Later that day, the clerk processes the transfers, sending $1,000 to your bank account, and $1,000 to the illicit arms dealer. Later, an ATF agent shows up at your doorstep accusing you of buying illegal guns, because the transaction from the person behind you was the last one in to th
In an attempt to save the situation, the prosecution called in an IRS agent to testify that, using an accounting method called LIFO (“last in, first out”), one could argue Lin’s stolen funds did indeed go to Tornado Cash. While LIFO makes sense in some circumstances, such as its common application by businesses accounting for their inventory, it’s a poor choice in this situation. Essentially, the agent testified that, if you assume that the last funds into a wallet are the also the first funds to be withdrawn, it can be established that the scammer’s deposit into the chainswap service went to Tornado Cash. Let’s use an overly simplistic example to illustrate the problem here. Let’s say you have $1,000 you want to move from one of your bank accounts to another bank account. For whatever reason, you decide the best way to do this is to walk to the corner shop and have them make a money transfer for you. The guy at the counter takes down your account information, puts it on a pile next to him, and you go about your day. Behind you in line, some other person is planning to send $1,000 to an illegal arms dealer. She gives that account information to the guy at the counter, and on the stack it goes. Later that day, the clerk processes the transfers, sending $1,000 to your bank account, and $1,000 to the illicit arms dealer. Later, an ATF agent shows up at your doorstep accusing you of buying illegal guns, because the transaction from the person behind you was the last one in to th

But shortly after this testimony, crypto sleuths discovered that the scam victim’s funds likely never were laundered through Tornado Cash at all.

Not only that, the “crypto recovery” service used by the victim may have been one identified by the FBI as a scam known for producing “incomplete or inaccurate tracing report[s]” (though this may be a separate company sharing a name, or impersonating a legitimate business).

#crypto #cryptocurrency#USpol#USpolitics

September 11, 2024
FBI San Diego Seizes Cryptocurrency Recovery Websites
SAN DIEGO — Special Agents with the FBI San Diego Field Office have seized websites belonging to three cryptocurrency recovery services. The seizures come as the FBI continues to crack down on an emerging scam tactic aimed at further defrauding cryptocurrency scam victims.

The web domains were from the following cryptocurrency recovery services: MyChargeBack, Payback LTD, and Claim Justice. These companies claim to provide cryptocurrency tracing and promise the ability to recover lost funds. Representatives of these companies often advertise strong success in recovering victim funds but have no track record in doing so. They often charge significant upfront fees and ask for a commission should funds be recovered. These companies use extensive social media advertising, including false reviews, to convince victims of the legitimacy of their services.

Potential ways to identify this type of scheme:

Recovery scheme fraudsters charge an up-front fee and either cease communication with the victim after receiving an initial deposit or produce an incomplete or inaccurate tracing report. They may also request additional fees to recover funds.
Fraudsters may claim affiliation with law enforcement or legal services to appear legitimate.
Scammers may reference actual financial institutions and money exchanges to build credibility and further their schemes.
Tips to avoid becoming a victim:
September 11, 2024 FBI San Diego Seizes Cryptocurrency Recovery Websites SAN DIEGO — Special Agents with the FBI San Diego Field Office have seized websites belonging to three cryptocurrency recovery services. The seizures come as the FBI continues to crack down on an emerging scam tactic aimed at further defrauding cryptocurrency scam victims. The web domains were from the following cryptocurrency recovery services: MyChargeBack, Payback LTD, and Claim Justice. These companies claim to provide cryptocurrency tracing and promise the ability to recover lost funds. Representatives of these companies often advertise strong success in recovering victim funds but have no track record in doing so. They often charge significant upfront fees and ask for a commission should funds be recovered. These companies use extensive social media advertising, including false reviews, to convince victims of the legitimacy of their services. Potential ways to identify this type of scheme: Recovery scheme fraudsters charge an up-front fee and either cease communication with the victim after receiving an initial deposit or produce an incomplete or inaccurate tracing report. They may also request additional fees to recover funds. Fraudsters may claim affiliation with law enforcement or legal services to appear legitimate. Scammers may reference actual financial institutions and money exchanges to build credibility and further their schemes. Tips to avoid becoming a victim:
Worse still, Payback may well have been one of three companies named in a September 2024 press release from the San Diego FBI office announcing the seizure of websites connected to scam crypto recovery services — although it is possible that the firm Lin used merely shares a name with a scam service.9 According to the FBI: “These companies claim to provide cryptocurrency tracing and promise the ability to recover lost funds. Representatives of these companies often advertise strong success in recovering victim funds but have no track record in doing so. They often charge significant upfront fees and ask for a commission should funds be recovered.” In other words, the prosecutors may have chosen a scam victim to put on the stand based solely on claims from a crypto “recovery” service the FBI has specifically named as charging fees to “produce an incomplete or inaccurate tracing report”.10
Worse still, Payback may well have been one of three companies named in a September 2024 press release from the San Diego FBI office announcing the seizure of websites connected to scam crypto recovery services — although it is possible that the firm Lin used merely shares a name with a scam service.9 According to the FBI: “These companies claim to provide cryptocurrency tracing and promise the ability to recover lost funds. Representatives of these companies often advertise strong success in recovering victim funds but have no track record in doing so. They often charge significant upfront fees and ask for a commission should funds be recovered.” In other words, the prosecutors may have chosen a scam victim to put on the stand based solely on claims from a crypto “recovery” service the FBI has specifically named as charging fees to “produce an incomplete or inaccurate tracing report”.10
This all sounds very heartwrenching, but there was one slight issue, apparently first noticed by crypto sleuth Taylor Monahan as she followed the trial coverage: the money stolen from Lin may never have gone to Tornado Cash at all. Monahan said her interest was initially drawn based on her experience tracing transfers from thousands of victims like Lin. “Those scammers don’t use Tornado Cash ... and they never have,” she wrote, explaining that “it’s nothing compared to their existing laundry networks” that can launder massive sums.7

Although no transaction details were mentioned in Lin’s testimony, Monahan was able to track down the transactions between Lin and the scammers from separate court cases involving seizures of funds from the same scam group. She repeated the tracing supposedly performed by Payback, discovering that no transfers ever went to Tornado Cash or to Coinbase, and that Payback apparently made an incredibly rookie mistake: by mishandling tracing of a chainswap transaction that batches together many unrelated deposits, they may have erroneously identified completely unrelated transfers to Coinbase and Tornado Cash as made by Lin’s scammer. Fellow crypto sleuth zachxbt later wrote that he’d repeated Monahan’s analysis and agreed with it, writing: “Idk how you mess up the tracing that bad ... It’s unfortunate these predatory firms come up as the first search results on Google when victims look for help.”8
This all sounds very heartwrenching, but there was one slight issue, apparently first noticed by crypto sleuth Taylor Monahan as she followed the trial coverage: the money stolen from Lin may never have gone to Tornado Cash at all. Monahan said her interest was initially drawn based on her experience tracing transfers from thousands of victims like Lin. “Those scammers don’t use Tornado Cash ... and they never have,” she wrote, explaining that “it’s nothing compared to their existing laundry networks” that can launder massive sums.7 Although no transaction details were mentioned in Lin’s testimony, Monahan was able to track down the transactions between Lin and the scammers from separate court cases involving seizures of funds from the same scam group. She repeated the tracing supposedly performed by Payback, discovering that no transfers ever went to Tornado Cash or to Coinbase, and that Payback apparently made an incredibly rookie mistake: by mishandling tracing of a chainswap transaction that batches together many unrelated deposits, they may have erroneously identified completely unrelated transfers to Coinbase and Tornado Cash as made by Lin’s scammer. Fellow crypto sleuth zachxbt later wrote that he’d repeated Monahan’s analysis and agreed with it, writing: “Idk how you mess up the tracing that bad ... It’s unfortunate these predatory firms come up as the first search results on Google when victims look for help.”8

That contortion is just one of several flaws in a prosecution that has been plagued by embarrassing blunders, including misattributing to a Tornado Cash developer text messages that were actually sent by a reporter.

#crypto #cryptocurrency#USpol#USpolitics

The misattributed messages
The prosecution in Storm’s case has really not covered themselves in glory thus far. First, it came to light that they fumbled extracting Telegram messages from a chat including Storm and Pertsev. It turns out a message quoted in Storm’s indictment and attributed to Pertsev, reading “Heya, anyone around to chat about axie? Would like to ask a few general questions about how one goes about cashing out 600 mil”, was actually a message forwarded by Pertsev from a CoinDesk journalist researching a story about the massive March 2022 Axie Infinity theft [W3IGG] and subsequent laundering of stolen funds.4

Although prosecutors have (sort of) admitted they misidentified the message forwarded by Pertsev as one he authored, they’re still arguing that their error is not material to the case, and that somehow forwarding the message made it a statement Pertsev “manifested [and] adopted or believed to be true”. They also claimed the defense waited to raise the issue in a “strategic decision to play ‘gotcha’ on the eve of trial”.5 The defense has petitioned the court to allow them to view grand jury transcripts, citing “grave concerns about the integrity of the grand jury proceedings since it appears that the government provided false information to the grand jury”, and suggested they may move to dismiss the case on that basis.6
The misattributed messages The prosecution in Storm’s case has really not covered themselves in glory thus far. First, it came to light that they fumbled extracting Telegram messages from a chat including Storm and Pertsev. It turns out a message quoted in Storm’s indictment and attributed to Pertsev, reading “Heya, anyone around to chat about axie? Would like to ask a few general questions about how one goes about cashing out 600 mil”, was actually a message forwarded by Pertsev from a CoinDesk journalist researching a story about the massive March 2022 Axie Infinity theft [W3IGG] and subsequent laundering of stolen funds.4 Although prosecutors have (sort of) admitted they misidentified the message forwarded by Pertsev as one he authored, they’re still arguing that their error is not material to the case, and that somehow forwarding the message made it a statement Pertsev “manifested [and] adopted or believed to be true”. They also claimed the defense waited to raise the issue in a “strategic decision to play ‘gotcha’ on the eve of trial”.5 The defense has petitioned the court to allow them to view grand jury transcripts, citing “grave concerns about the integrity of the grand jury proceedings since it appears that the government provided false information to the grand jury”, and suggested they may move to dismiss the case on that basis.6

Then, prosecutors called as a witness a woman who had fallen victim to a $250,000 cryptocurrency scam. Their argument seems to have been that Tornado Cash developers should have helped her in ways that were technologically impossible.

#crypto #cryptocurrency#USpol#USpolitics

The scam victim
Then, prosecutors invited their first witness: a woman named Hanfeng Lin, who told her story of falling for a pig butchering scam that started with a message from a stranger on WhatsApp and ended in her losing around $250,000 — her life savings. The woman contacted Payback, a company that specializes in “crypto recovery” — essentially, consulting services to trace stolen crypto assets in hopes of getting them back — and, after likely paying them anywhere from $3,500 to $10,000 for their help, was handed a report showing that $150,000 of the stolen funds went to Tornado Cash (along with smaller transfers to Coinbase, Binance, and FTX) and instructions to email those entities.a The victim did so, and prosecutors argued that Tornado Cash developers never responded to help her, which I guess prosecutors think they should have managed to do.b
The scam victim Then, prosecutors invited their first witness: a woman named Hanfeng Lin, who told her story of falling for a pig butchering scam that started with a message from a stranger on WhatsApp and ended in her losing around $250,000 — her life savings. The woman contacted Payback, a company that specializes in “crypto recovery” — essentially, consulting services to trace stolen crypto assets in hopes of getting them back — and, after likely paying them anywhere from $3,500 to $10,000 for their help, was handed a report showing that $150,000 of the stolen funds went to Tornado Cash (along with smaller transfers to Coinbase, Binance, and FTX) and instructions to email those entities.a The victim did so, and prosecutors argued that Tornado Cash developers never responded to help her, which I guess prosecutors think they should have managed to do.b

That contortion is just one of several flaws in a prosecution that has been plagued by embarrassing blunders, including misattributing to a Tornado Cash developer text messages that were actually sent by a reporter.

#crypto #cryptocurrency#USpol#USpolitics

The misattributed messages
The prosecution in Storm’s case has really not covered themselves in glory thus far. First, it came to light that they fumbled extracting Telegram messages from a chat including Storm and Pertsev. It turns out a message quoted in Storm’s indictment and attributed to Pertsev, reading “Heya, anyone around to chat about axie? Would like to ask a few general questions about how one goes about cashing out 600 mil”, was actually a message forwarded by Pertsev from a CoinDesk journalist researching a story about the massive March 2022 Axie Infinity theft [W3IGG] and subsequent laundering of stolen funds.4

Although prosecutors have (sort of) admitted they misidentified the message forwarded by Pertsev as one he authored, they’re still arguing that their error is not material to the case, and that somehow forwarding the message made it a statement Pertsev “manifested [and] adopted or believed to be true”. They also claimed the defense waited to raise the issue in a “strategic decision to play ‘gotcha’ on the eve of trial”.5 The defense has petitioned the court to allow them to view grand jury transcripts, citing “grave concerns about the integrity of the grand jury proceedings since it appears that the government provided false information to the grand jury”, and suggested they may move to dismiss the case on that basis.6
The misattributed messages The prosecution in Storm’s case has really not covered themselves in glory thus far. First, it came to light that they fumbled extracting Telegram messages from a chat including Storm and Pertsev. It turns out a message quoted in Storm’s indictment and attributed to Pertsev, reading “Heya, anyone around to chat about axie? Would like to ask a few general questions about how one goes about cashing out 600 mil”, was actually a message forwarded by Pertsev from a CoinDesk journalist researching a story about the massive March 2022 Axie Infinity theft [W3IGG] and subsequent laundering of stolen funds.4 Although prosecutors have (sort of) admitted they misidentified the message forwarded by Pertsev as one he authored, they’re still arguing that their error is not material to the case, and that somehow forwarding the message made it a statement Pertsev “manifested [and] adopted or believed to be true”. They also claimed the defense waited to raise the issue in a “strategic decision to play ‘gotcha’ on the eve of trial”.5 The defense has petitioned the court to allow them to view grand jury transcripts, citing “grave concerns about the integrity of the grand jury proceedings since it appears that the government provided false information to the grand jury”, and suggested they may move to dismiss the case on that basis.6

As the prosecution of Tornado Cash developer Roman Storm unfolds, the government’s theory is colliding with Trump administration policies that have left prosecutors arguing Storm should have followed compliance rules they’re no longer allowed to say he was required to follow.

https://www.citationneeded.news/tornado-cash-roman-storm-prosecution/

#crypto #cryptocurrency#USpolitics#USpol

"De regering-Trump beschouwt het als een belang voor de Amerikaanse nationale veiligheid dat de Europese Unie wordt ontmanteld, dat Europa nationalistisch, christelijk, conservatief en wit wordt, dat migratie wordt stopgezet en teruggedraaid, en dat digitale desinformatie en propaganda geen strobreed in de weg wordt gelegd."

Take note.

https://www.demorgen.be/meningen/het-doel-van-de-vs-regimewisseling-in-europa~b2d11f5c9/

#USpol #propaganda

Just in case you needed another reason to boycott Google:

Report: Google-owned YouTube has published an Israeli video that accuses the UN of deliberately "failing to distribute aid."

"The video is promoted in the UK by the Israeli Government Advertising Agency."

https://www.middleeasteye.net/live-blog/live-blog-update/israel-pays-google-promote-video-about-gaza-famine

#BoycottGoogle#UKComplicity#USPol#UKPol#EuroPol#CdnPoli#BDS#IsraeliLies#GazaGenocide @palestine .

Radieschen
Radieschen boosted

People who think Trump is "in trouble" and "this is really it" are in for one more chance at a learning experience. On the actual left (not Democrats), this would rightfully be a career-ender, and that's why the left are better than the right. But on the right (including corporate Dems), nearly any rift in a coalition gets healed with money. Loads and loads of it. Watch how they do it. Then stop thinking scandal is going to make a difference and join a group. #trump #epstein #uspol #uspolitics

Interview: “Precisely Designed Mass Starvation”

“I’ve been working on this field of famine, food crisis & humanitarian action for more than 40 years, & there is no case, over those four decades...

...of such minutely engineered, closely monitored, precisely designed mass starvation of a population as is happening in Gaza today."

~Alex de Waal

https://www.democracynow.org/2025/7/21/forensic_architecture

#GazaGenocide#GHF#USPol#EuroPol#BDS#Racism #IsraeliCrimesAgainstHumanity#GazaStarvation  @palestine .