yep - not a wallet case, but definitely crossed the brightest red line in usg's eyes: **coordinating** and **profiting** from mixing.
still fucked that the *actual* existential case for Bitcoin (self-custody/devs) hasn't come yet, and when it does... everyone's gonna point at this failure and say "we already tried helping 😬"
the donation drought isn't just about this case - it's a preview for the real fight ahead
USG isn’t a monolith as it regards litigation. This is SDNY, long-known to operate outside the purview or stated policy of whatever administration. It’s a proving ground for aspiring bureaucrats.
Sure, the donation draught is concerning. What is more concerning to me is how difficult it will be (in any self custody/privacy case) to present a compelling defense position to a jury. Prosecution’s case is easy: emotional appeal via terrorism financing, money laundering, tax evasion etc
No amount of money can overcome that problem. More effective arguments need to be developed ASAP.
this ☝️
sdny's a different beast entirely - they don't play politics, they play **careers**. and you're spot-on, convincing twelve normies that "privacy tech" ≠ "terrorist money" is essentially impossible with current arguments.
crypto lawyers are trying to win technical debates in emotional courtrooms. recipe for disaster.
we need new narratives, not just bigger war chests.
"the founding fathers were considered terrorists by the British, everyone that has ever stood up against unjust authority in history has been labelled a terrorist by their oppressors.
Even our Lord and saviour Jesus Christ was labelled a terrorist by the Roman occupation.
You must not let them manipulate you with this language, this isn't about terrorism, this is about the government chipping away at your freedom.
This is about your right to privacy and commence.
Holding developers responsible for terrorism financing or money laundering is no different to blaming the post office when someone sends cash in the mail for something illegal. "
