Hacker News Reader

Comment by curiousObject | Hacker News Reader

Kim DC is not a likeable or admirable person, but this vindictive pursuit seems even worse.

It appears very similar to the treatment of Ross Ulbricht, Assange, maybe even Snowden?

These are the equivalent of white collar crimes (typical massive frauds from the finance sector, etc) but they are getting a blue collar punishment of decades in jail that a successful and persistent street drug dealer could receive, NOT the few years in comfort camp prison that white collar frauds usually get.

View on HN

One of these things is not like the other. Ross Ulbricht was part of a murder for hire scheme, and was not a whistle blower or anything close to a reporter.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ross_Ulbricht#Murder-for-hire_...

I understand what you are saying, but I wonder if that is the right type of defense here. Each of those individuals could be separated from otherwise sympathetic audience by diving the audience( 'he is x$ and therefore bad' approach ).

Same here. Murder for hire is bad, but his prosecution was about just as bad[1] and one could argue that (edit) by using warrantless spying without any probable cause undermined US constitutional rights. In a grand scheme of things, it is better to have one criminal get away than trample on everyone's rights.

What they do have in common, however, is an inordinate amount of resources expended to punish them by the state..

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ross_Ulbricht#Murder-for-hire_...

You realize that the moderators in question were Secret Service and DEA agents creating fictional scenarios to line their own pockets

Their involvement and indictment was withheld during the Ross trial and they went to prison for that

Ross was not charged for these scenes, the other district court is saving face by calling it redundant and dropping it but it’s really a shaky case

It shouldn’t have been brought up in sentencing, but there is no accountability in a judge doing so

https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/news/cyber-vault/2019-12-13/silk-r...

You're right that he wasn't charged, but: "For example, because Ulbricht contested his responsibility for the five commissioned murders for hire, the district court found by a preponderance of the evidence that Ulbricht did in fact commission the murders, believing that they would be carried out." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ross_Ulbricht#cite_note-46

Just because something doesn't rise to the level of provability of getting charged and sentenced for it doesn't mean that you can't say with a high level of confidence it happened.

I didnt say it didnt happen

Corrupt, convicted ex government agents staged the murders, there is video evidence of some of them that they made for Ross to pay them. Which got them convicted.

Ross was not charged with that, wasnt charged with conspiracy to do that, wasnt put in front of a jury for that. Because the government would lose that case because of their corrupt agents and agencies (Baltimore FBI which hosted the skit) messing up the case.

This doesnt warrant a double life sentence for the crimes he was convicted of.

1 presidential candidate will commute (basically saying ~9 years is enough, ending this debate), 1 presidential candidate will pardon completely, 1 will likely do neither until the FreeRoss campaign learns how to do campaign contributions. Its only a matter of time as crypto savants gain position

So we're led to believe. But Ulbricht was identified via domestic NSA wiretaps; they used parallel construction to prosecute (oh yeh, the FBI just happened to stumble onto a Stackoverflow question of his years ago and used proper warrants against that!).

Why would I swallow any childish stories that the US attorney made up?

White collar crimes should be punished with the same vigor as blue collar ones. White collar crimes mostly steal money, at scale. Insufficient money is a huge cause of suffering—people don’t get to retire at early, they and their kids don’t get the opportunities they would have had otherwise.

You can be a drug dealer that doesn’t hurt anybody.

No. Drug dealers always hurt people - we have the word Pharmacist for good drug dispensers.

There is a huge difference between a regulated and controlled system and your neighborhood methhead mixing up something in his kitchen to sell to the kids a couple of blocks over

Regulated and controlled systems sold a ton of opioids.

your name is extremely ironic next to your post

Do you actually believe that or is this some sort of rhetorical point? This stretches my suspension of disbelief to be honest.

People can buy very addictive drugs from pharmacists (legal drugs are a huge contributor to the opioid epidemic), and there were doctors in some areas that were known for being extremely lax about that sort of thing.

Lots of the illegal drug dealers do sell really harmful stuff. But before it was legalized they sold weed…

We should not pretend our laws are perfect, they are always undergoing refinement.

Disagree. Someone who is well and truly addicted to drugs does, in fact, need it like the air they breathe. Drug dealers provide a necessary service to those folks where a lot (most?) of the "above the belt" services aimed at rehabilitation either fail completely or make matters actively worse.

Many of them should be treated to non-violent home theft, adjusted for the value of the fraud.

Defrauded people out of 10M? That's about as much or more than 1000 home thefts, which would probably land you in prison for life.

OK, but if you want to judge white collar crime and blue collar crime with the same yardstick, you have to put a price on human suffering. How much money do I have to embezzle so it's equivalent to a punch in the face? How much so it's equivalent to a murder? By a scale of suffering caused, I would argue that embezzling a very large sum can be much worse than an assault. On the other hand, not every murder causes the same amount of suffering.

I remain unconvinced that the relative punishments of the two categories is either pragmatic or fair, mind you.

One of the things worse than a bad law is an inconsistently applied bad law, as that allows for it to be tolerated for longer and effectively enshrines the basis for the inconsistency as the true law of the land.

I'd go along with unfair, but it does seem pragmatic to keep criminals who would harm anyone in striking distance away from the public, while only keeping criminals who would harm corporate and investor interests away from executive positions and boardrooms.

US Gov's revenge-deployment machine was first put in motion at the request copyright industry (which funds elections).

Through the 2000s and 2010s, legislators (and by extension LEO agencies) were extremely responsive to whims of copyright lobbyists. ex: ICE agents patrolling events for locals selling knock-off goods.

It was so pervasive, news orgs noticed it - and even covered some non-sensational incidents. Though I don't recall journalists ever following the money.

>but this vindictive pursuit seems even worse.

Seems to be pretty much how the US government operates on these high profile tech cases. They are going to turn you into a martyr.

Ross is a great example of this. He received a double life sentence + 40 years + no chance of parole. By comparison, El Chapo, a dude who most certainly ordered the deaths of many and imported billions of dollars of drugs, only got a SINGLE life sentence + no chance of parole.

That is not justice, its a message.

He's not one of "them" (bankers, politicians, lobbyists).

Street dealers as well: not belong to "them".

See how Epstein was punished in 2008:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Epstein#Legal_proceedi...

"On June 30, 2008, after Epstein pleaded guilty to a state charge of procuring for prostitution a girl below age 18, he was sentenced to eighteen months in prison. While most convicted sex offenders in Florida are sent to state prison, Epstein was instead housed in a private wing of the Palm Beach County Stockade and [...] allowed to leave the jail on "work release" for up to twelve hours a day, six days a week."

That's for a horrible crime. Not for allowing people to copy some audio and video files for entertainment purpose.

He was one of "them".

Why is the parent comment being downvoted? Is it stating something incorrect or is the conclusion incorrect?

> but this vindictive pursuit seems even worse.

It's been profitable for the US agencies that stole millions for KDC

https://www.techdirt.com/2015/03/27/how-us-government-legall...

Don't forget Aaron Swartz.

Are the actions of these individuals really the equivalent of financial fraud?

Assange and Snowden especially, who revealed to the public crimes perpetrated by agents of the US federal govt.

Bernie Madoff got real prison time for his white collar crimes.

Likely due to the high profile nature of his crime. He still only served time in a tame white collar prison too.

I assume they’re talking about hiding being the corporate veil and just getting a slap on the wrist. Embezzlers are caught and sentenced all the time but people on the board of directors get away with a fine and finger waggle for similar activities

Bernie Madoff is notable because someone of his stature being pursued so vigorously is rare. If officials went after every financial industry criminal with the same energy, the financial industry would cease to exist. Likewise, executives who sign off on decisions that actually kill people (Boeing) rarely see jail time.

They only went after Madoff because he stole from the rich.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com