40 ms·

Ross Ulbricht granted a full pardon

• TacticalCoder 2y ago
  [dead]
• deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
• sidibe 2y ago
  Among other things this guy was trying to have people murdered.
  • UncleOxidant 2y ago
    I guess this is why he was upset about Mexico sending drug dealers and murderers - he didn't want competition for our homegrown drug dealers and murderers.
• lif 2y ago
  [flagged]
• mbStavola 2y ago
  Without any snark, why? What's the motivation?
  • deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  • lostmikeys 2y ago
    There's probably still some SR btc they wanted the keys to.
  • mannerheim 2y ago
    Possibly a deal with the Libertarian Party, which chose not to run their candidate in several states to help Trump: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhDKYYdD2vY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhDKYYdD2vY
  • qqqult 2y ago
    It was one of the promises he made at a Bitcoin conference he attended a few months ago. It has been a popular issue in crypto circles
    • foogazi 2y ago
      Just feels all around
  • mythrwy 2y ago
    Two life sentences was a bit harsh. 11 years seems about right to me. I suspect the idea beyond "Free Ross" in some circles was that his conviction wasn't so much about drug dealing, but rather it was more a political prosecution for popularizing real uses of cryptocurrencies.
• anotherhue 2y ago
  Paraphrasing an aphorism I saw elsewhere: "Crime is legal now".
  • TacticalCoder 2y ago
    [dead]
  • l0ng1nu5 2y ago
    “If a law is unjust a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so” - Thomas Jefferson
    • Aloisius 2y ago
      He tried to have multiple people murdered.
      • lupusreal 2y ago
        Jefferson did, certainly. He was instrumental in starting a war from what I understand. Ross though? The government alleged it but never bothered to prove it. Furthermore the government agents involved were laughably corrupt, so anything they alleged needs to be taken with a massive grain of salt. For all anybody here know, they fabricated the entire assassination story to distract the public from their plot to loot Ross's money (which unlike the assassination stuff, has been proven in court.)
    • mmcwilliams 2y ago
      Thomas Jefferson was a slave owner.
      • l0ng1nu5 2y ago
        So were most aristocrats of the time. Applying presentism doesn't invalidate the idea.
        • 2y ago
• maplant 2y ago
  I had no idea this was a campaign promise. Why? I don’t understand.
  • acegopher 2y ago
    because the crypto bros love him
    • 1oooqooq 2y ago
      who else will buy new treasury DOGE coins?
  • defrost 2y ago
    * Ulbricht's conviction became a cause célèbre in American libertarian circles. * In May 2024, candidate Donald Trump said that if re-elected President, he would commute Ulbricht's sentence on his first day in office ~ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ross_Ulbricht https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ross_Ulbricht I doubt Trump cares about Ulbricht as much as he cares (for whatever reason) about the continued support of various American libertarians (Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and various crypto elites). While he has made many promises this is significant for being one that he has kept.
    • apsec112 2y ago
      RFK Jr is definitely not a libertarian (even compared to someone mainstream like Gary Johnson or Jared Polis), he supports strong state intervention in many areas of the economy and society
    • godshatter 2y ago
      It's odd because libertarian candidates usually only garner 1% to 3% of the votes. It does appear that there are a lot of libertarians that vote Republican because of the stigma third parties have, though. As someone who often votes for libertarian candidates, I can't understand it. Republicans are about as libertarian as a cheese sandwich.
  • monero-xmr 2y ago
• yuppiepuppie 2y ago
  Wasn’t he in jail for hiring a contract killer? I’m all for the freeing him of his crimes when it comes to his crypto anarchic philosophy. But I find it hard to pardon someone for contract killing essentially. Also I’m not an apologist for the FBIs handling of this case either.
  • hypeatei 2y ago
    No, that charge was dropped. IIRC, it was on shaky ground and they were just trying to throw the book at him.
    • tzs 2y ago
      The charge was dropped, but the court did hold a hearing on it when deciding on sentencing. They heard the evidence for and against and ruled by a preponderance of the evidence that he did in fact do it.
      • beezle 2y ago
        Wonder if he can be charged with that now? Was there anything in the pardon related to this? AFAIK there is no time limit on bringing charges related to murder?
      • UncleOxidant 2y ago
        Then why would they drop the charge if they thought the evidence pointed to the fact he did it.
        • cjbgkagh 2y ago
          'preponderance' is the clue, criminal is 'beyond all reasonable doubt', civil is preponderance. Ross was being charged under criminal law.
          • qingcharles 2y ago
            This. Evidence that isn't strong enough to criminally convict can be used for other purposes (e.g. sentencing, knowledge/intent, civil forfeiture, civil damages etc). (see OJ Simpson paying money damages for a crime he was acquitted of)
• l0ng1nu5 2y ago
  Absolute no brainer, he should be celebrated. Countless lives were saved via the harm reduction effect of a peer reviewed, reputation based platform. Of course if we had less draconian drug policy, it wouldn't be necessary but here we are.
  • maplant 2y ago
    There is absolutely no way harm reduction was the reason Trump pardoned him.
    • l0ng1nu5 2y ago
      It's absolutely one of the reasons why it was politically beneficial for him to enact the pardon.
  • Devasta 2y ago
    He tried to hire multiple hitmen.
  • bdndndndbve 2y ago
    Does trump also support needle exchanges and safe consumption sites?
    • vkou 2y ago
      As well as online drug marketplaces? Or would running one without legal trouble require a campaign-contribution booster pack? What a beautiful political anschluss between people who just want to ban contraceptives and abortifacients, and people who just want to shoot up heroin. Not sure how you square that circle[1], but it's 2025, and here we are. It's very telling about libertarian priorities when a cryptobro running an online drug marketplace who tried to hire a hitman gets amnesty, while hundreds of thousands of people who have been convicted of drug possession[1] do not. Likewise, somehow reproductive rights are just not a libertarian issue, either. It's not a party of freedom, it's a party of freedom for wealthy men. [1] Biden gave a blanket pardon for people convicted of marijuana posession, but that's far less important for libertarians than Ulbricht.
• s1mon 2y ago
  I really wonder who benefits from this. Trump only does things that are good for him, or those close to him. I realize he's been making connections to the crypto world, and has his own meme coins. Does pardoning Ross somehow make crypto more valuable?
  • tonymet 2y ago
    Trump made the deal at the Libertarian National Convention to garner their support.
    • SV_BubbleTime 2y ago
      It’s almost a scandal that politician followed through on a campaign promise.
  • mannerheim 2y ago
    A video from Reason magazine a few days ago[0] mentioned a deal between the Libertarian Party leadership and Trump in which they selectively didn't run their candidate in several states in order to help Trump. If this is true, Trump could have reneged, but evidently decided whatever political blowback for pardoning Ulbricht (which is probably small potatoes at this rate) wasn't worth the credibility cost. [0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhDKYYdD2vY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhDKYYdD2vY
  • orionsbelt 2y ago
    It’s also just good politics. There are a vocal group of voters that are in favor of this, so it gets those people on his side. And no reason not to (politically), as most people just don’t care about this topic, or if they do and disagree with the decision, this isn’t going to be the action that moves the needle for them on how they feel about Trump or the Republican Party.
  • drak0n1c 2y ago
    Partisan caricature is not a reliable starting point for logical inference or deduction. To answer your question - on the campaign trail he attended a convention of libertarian organizers and promised them that if he won he would free Ross, and has followed through on that promise today.
• qdhazEWT 2y ago
  Trump refused to pardon Assange and Snowden. I suppose he has priorities. In 2021, presumably during SBF's (big Democrat donor) FTX scam, Trump thought that Bitcoin was a scam: https://www.bbc.com/news/business-57392734 https://www.bbc.com/news/business-57392734 Now he is best friends with the "crypto", AI, and H1B bros.
  • labster 2y ago
    [flagged]
    • UncleOxidant 2y ago
      Yep. He's not opposed to a scam so long as he's on the money-receiving side of it.
      • throwway120385 2y ago
        To wit his wife just launched one.
  • llamaimperative 2y ago
    > “All my Republican donations were dark,” [SBF] said, referring to political donations that are not publicly disclosed in FEC filings. “The reason was not for regulatory reasons, it’s because reporters freak the f—k out if you donate to Republicans. They’re all super liberal, and I didn’t want to have that fight.” > Given that he donated nearly $40 million to Democrats in the 2022 election cycle—and he admitted to giving an equal amount to Republicans—his total political contributions may have actually been around $80 million. https://time.com/6241262/sam-bankman-fried-political-donations/ https://time.com/6241262/sam-bankman-fried-political-donatio...
• aaron695 2y ago
  [dead]
• johnneville 2y ago
  I would find this easier to celebrate if it was a commutation and not a pardon, or if it was a pardon that went hand in hand with a change in the laws he broke.
  • ktallett 2y ago
    Because their isn't a change in law doesn't mean the convictions were secure and bound by law before.
  • School-Cotton 2y ago
    > a pardon that went hand in hand with a change in the laws he broke Trump doesn't have the power to unilaterally change laws (fortunately!)
• manofhiseord 2y ago
  [flagged]
• wumeow 2y ago
  [flagged]
  • hilux 2y ago
    [flagged]
• hypeatei 2y ago
  This is a rare Trump win. There are many things to criticize him for, but this pardon isn't one of them. I don't think anyone, after researching this case, would be okay with the life sentence handed down to Ross.
  • wkat4242 2y ago
    Life no but probably more than he did in the end. He was really turning into a syndicate boss. The deep ars technica article was pretty depressing.
  • latentcall 2y ago
    Most people in real life don’t even know who this guy is. This is a guy that online people know. I will agree it’s a win, he was unfairly sentenced. I just wish I would have been able to buy from SR. I did get to browse it before it was seized.
• kevinsync 2y ago
  I have nothing in particular to say about the dead comments in this very young thread, but they're sort-of-interesting comments to have been killed so quickly! Is it due to HN policy? I guess they're subjective and ideological, and prone to starting arguments rather than debates. Maybe "Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. That tramples curiosity." or "Please don't pick the most provocative thing in an article or post to complain about in the thread. Find something interesting to respond to instead."? I'm honestly just curious as a conscientious internet citizen lol
  • Jtsummers 2y ago
    > I have nothing in particular to say about the dead comments in this very young thread, but they're sort-of-interesting comments to have been killed so quickly! [dead] is different than [flagged][dead]. [dead]-only (no [flagged]) means they're auto-dead, they aren't killed by someone reviewing the comments (moderator or users flagging). One of the two commenters was shadow banned years ago but still gets vouched for occasionally (including by me at times). The other one was shadow banned (looked through their history) 11 days ago, with a comment from dang at the time stating as much. They also get vouched for on occasion, based on their comment history. > Maybe "Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. That tramples curiosity." or "Please don't pick the most provocative thing in an article or post to complain about in the thread. Find something interesting to respond to instead."? dang does usually respond to people with something like that first, then for people who get repeatedly flagged or repeatedly engage in certain kinds of behavior, he bans them.
  • qqqult 2y ago
    Nothing wrong with HN in particular. Every polarising discussion on a platform with moderation or up/down voting system ends up this way. This structure is fantastic for technical discussions just not amazing for politics Removing moderation or voting systems (simple chronological comment sorting) creates another set of issues so this problem can't be solved without entirely changing discussion formats
    • potato3732842 2y ago
• steve_avery 2y ago
  Well, I think that justice has been served. The feds' prosecution of Ulbricht was the epitome of throwing the book at someone to make an example, when the government's case was pretty flawed, in my opinion. 10 years is enough time to pay the debt of running the silk road. I am glad that Ulbricht has been pardoned and I feel like a small iota of justice has been returned to the world with this action.
  • fsckboy 2y ago
    wasn't there evidence of hiring a hitman to commit a murder in furtherance of the Silk Road? that's not part of "the debt of running the silk road"
    • alt187 2y ago
      The hitman was a conman for a murder on a fictitious person. While he fully believed he was committing a real assassination, you can't convict people for killing imaginary people.
      • croes 2y ago
        This doesn’t sound like an imaginary person https://www.vice.com/en/article/murdered-silk-road-employee-sentenced-to-time-served/ https://www.vice.com/en/article/murdered-silk-road-employee-...
        • px43 2y ago
          I'm not convinced that you looked at the article you linked. > That’s because he was the Silk Road employee implicated in an elaborate, and fake, murder-for-hire scheme, created in part by a corrupt Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) agent.
          • croes 2y ago
            The murder was fake not the murder order. >DPR contacted one of his trusted drug dealer contacts, Nob, and asked him to kill Green for $40,000. Shortly after, Nob sent DPR photos of Green covered in Campbell’s Chicken & Stars soup and victim of an apparent asphyxiation, to prove the murder had been carried out. > Unbeknown to DPR, Nob was no drug dealer. In fact, Nob was Carl Mark Force IV, the very same DEA agent who had arrested Green.
• fake_ayn_rand 2y ago
  [flagged]
• cakealert 2y ago
  I wonder if he is going to be able to launder and cash out whatever crypto he squirreled away. His finances are probably going to be closely watched. Starting a business that accepts crypto payments is going to be a tell.
  • ktallett 2y ago
    He has admitted his wrong doings and made efforts to change whilst in prison. I doubt he will go straight back to a life even remotely close to before. He was doing good in prison for other inmates and I imagine he will continue doing the same now he has this second chance.
    • notyourwork 2y ago
      What the future holds for someone who was pardoned is likely decided based on very different rationalization compared to how one acts while serving a lifetime prison sentence.
      • ktallett 2y ago
        Whilst I understand your point of view that the change in circumstances can change how someone decides to act, I don't believe there is much history to show someone who gained a surprising second chance outside of prison has gone back to their previous life.
        • bdhcuidbebe 2y ago
          > I don't believe there is much history to show someone who gained a surprising second chance outside of prison has gone back to their previous life. Didnt have to look far, from dec 9: https://lawandcrime.com/crime/exonerated-man-heading-back-to-prison-again-for-murder-after-being-freed-from-life-sentence-and-given-4-1-million-settlement-for-serving-24-years-for-another-slaying/ https://lawandcrime.com/crime/exonerated-man-heading-back-to...
          • 2y ago
• lupusreal 2y ago
  This conversation is presently flagged. Why? When Ross was sentenced HN had a discussion about it with more than 600 comments. His conviction has been discussed numerous additional times in other threads throughout the years. His pardon is plainly on-topic for HN, and this discussion is a necessary followup to those previous discussions.
  • kingstoned 2y ago
    [flagged]
  • dang 2y ago
    Of course it's on topic. Why did users flag it? Probably some combination of not liking the event itself and fatigue with political stories. But that's just a guess. In any case, we turned the flags off when we saw it.
    • foldr 2y ago
      Is it more on topic than the Musk Nazi salute thing, which you chose not to unflag? The comments are equally predictable in both cases.
      • tptacek 2y ago
        It is much more on-topic than the Musk thing. HN has been debating this conviction, in intricate detail, since 2015. Meanwhile, you can just go to any news site from CNN to Fox to the Guardian to see the Musk thing. There's stuff to talk about with the Ulbricht story, and basically nothing to talk about with the Musk thing, except for subsets of both sides who are just itching to have a flamewar about it.
        • foldr 2y ago
          The Ulbricht story is also in the news. I don't see that there's a ton to say about it that hasn't come up in the previous (exhaustive) discussions that you mention. The people who thought Ulbricht was prosecuted unjustly are happy and the people who didn't are less happy (unless they thought the sentence was too harsh). I suspect that we just disagree about the significance of the Musk story.
• fzeroracer 2y ago
  [flagged]
  • thrance 2y ago
    They've gone full doublethink, like when Trump claimed Jan 6 was done by antifas, but then pardoned them all and no one seemed to remember.
  • juniperus 2y ago
    Most libertarians considered the Silk Road a place to buy psychedelics like LSD or mushrooms or experimental synthetic drugs (not that these don’t come with numerous risks). Not a bulk heroin warehouse. So the perception is different from that of a wholesale fentanyl clearing house.
  • heavyset_go 2y ago
    > But it seems they don't have a problem with someone running an illegal underground drug smuggling network because...? People have a soft spot for enterprising wunderkinds of certain demographics, even if he wasn't actually a kid when he start SR. A good boy like Ross doesn't belong in prison, but the person arrested for smoking crack does, is a common sentiment.
  • qeternity 2y ago
    Well for one, Libertarians are not far right in the way you are describing...
  • croissants 2y ago
    A possible line of reasoning is that drugs should be legal, but the property and violent crimes committed around them shouldn't be, in the same way that adults are legally permitted to drink alcohol, but they're not legally permitted to drive drunk. The "ruining cities" is about the crimes, not the drugs themselves. (I think.)
    • fzeroracer 2y ago
      That's the logically consistent line of thought, yes. Which is one I don't particularly disagree with, because of the harm the war on drugs has caused. But the inconsistency comes from people advocating for a black market drug site and bending towards the far right. The same people who in the same breath also further criminalize drugs, reduce access to things that help addicts while arguing that drug dealers should be deported and our streets swept. The logical inconsistency is that 'their' drug dealers are conducted by people of virtue therefore they did nothing to break the law. And not being willing to deal with the actual fallout of said illegal drug empire.
• toomuchtodo 2y ago
  https://archive.today/FNvkp https://archive.today/FNvkp
• bb88 2y ago
  Genuine question: Of all the people to pardon, why him?
  • duxup 2y ago
    [flagged]
    • bb88 2y ago
      Why now, and not 4 years from now when Trump is about to leave office? How do republicans in Idaho (who don't even have medical marijuana on the books), defend Trump pardoning someone convicted of drug trafficking?
      • duxup 2y ago
        Why not now? Trump isn't up for re-election. It's his act alone. He promised in the election to pardon other criminals and it didn't hurt him.
        • kevin_thibedeau 2y ago
          [flagged]
          • duxup 2y ago
            Well even if he bet on going that route he wouldn't have to be "elected", and my last line applies none the less, it didn't hurt him during an actual election.
          • plagiarist 2y ago
            Yes. Except, "neutralize?" I don't know why the federal government would bother with the pretense of a 22nd Amendment when they demonstrably do not care in the slightest about the 14th or most of the Bill of Rights.
      • ZYbCRq22HbJ2y7 2y ago
• gWPVhyxPHqvk 2y ago
  [flagged]
  • bobxmax 2y ago
    Drug dealers, cop killers and family members. America's institutions continue to devolve into a cruel joke.
  • deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  • 65 2y ago
    Do you think it's possible the 11 years he spent in prison could have had any rehabilitation effect? Or should we jail anyone who ever commits a crime to a life sentence?
    • jazzyjackson 2y ago
      Whether Ulbricht is a changed man is somewhat immaterial to the signaling to other young would-be drug kingpins that the President thinks you shouldn't be punished so harshly for setting up online black markets.
      • hellojesus 2y ago
        I agree: online black markets should be free trade. If drugs were legalized, even fewer issues would exist, and it would be easier to isolate the actual crime which imposes negative, third party externalities like traffiking or violence.
    • gWPVhyxPHqvk 2y ago
      A) yes, probably B) I don’t see this sort of leniency being offered to other drug dealers, in fact, the Trump administration wants to designate Mexican cartels as terrorist organizations. C) a day 1 pardon communicates that it’s a top priority of the administration that drug dealers and cop killers (Jan 6) get freed. D) he was convicted by a jury of his peers who know full well what a judge would sentence him to. Now Trump comes out to overrule that. The time to change sentencing would have been pre-trial. We tried doing that, but that was a massive loser electorally.
• macinjosh 2y ago
  I am happy to see that Trump is a man of his word. I voted for him just because of this campaign promise. I would have voted for almost anyone who promised this.
  • llamaimperative 2y ago
    What were your number 2 and 3 issues, out of curiosity? Were there any accompanying policies that you would say, "despite promising to free Ross Ulbricht, I don't think accompanying Policy X would be worth it?"
  • dimator 2y ago
    This one act was more important than the Paris agreement?
    • macinjosh 2y ago
      Immensely more important than an ineffective agreement on an overblown problem.
      • lom 2y ago
        Wow, I couldn’t disagree more
    • ein0p 2y ago
      [flagged]
      • CabSauce 2y ago
        You're right. I guess we just shouldn't do anything. And somehow it's virtue signaling and reduces output?
        • ein0p 2y ago
          Yes. If you stop producing steel (which we kinda did), and just buy it from China instead, you haven't "eliminated emissions". You've merely moved them to a country which is currently not subject to the environmental limits. We are on the same planet - in the long run it doesn't matter where you burn coal.
• FergusArgyll 2y ago
  This thread is a great lesson in "Politics is a mind virus" I recommend you read the HN thread when Ulbricht was sentenced [0] first, then come here and read all the "Honest, genuine question, why?"s Then start practicing not letting politics influence your thought process https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9626985 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9626985
  • rcpt 2y ago
    The main thing I notice is that back then we were writing paragraphs.
    • zoklet-enjoyer 2y ago
      I mostly stopped typing in paragraphs because I use a smart phone for most of my internetting. It's a lot easier to write your thoughts on a keyboard
      • dredmorbius 2y ago
        Using a touchscreen halves my IQ. (I'm challenged enough to start with.)
    • pizza 2y ago
      The value of the <EOS> token has gone up since then.
    • JHonaker 2y ago
      Wow. I thought you were being glib, but the average comment length is noticeably higher in the linked discussion. While length isn’t necessarily a valid proxy for meaningful conversation, this was definitely an eye-opening contrast to the current thread.
  • ktallett 2y ago
    [flagged]
    • 2y ago
• BurningFrog 2y ago
  Keep in mind that he spent 11 years locked up. He's not getting off lightly!
  • bb88 2y ago
    It's still not enough.
  • mplewis 2y ago
    What do you mean "lightly?" He ran an illegal drug market and tried to assassinate a competitor. We gave him the punishment that society has determined one should receive for this. Revoking his punishment is "light."
    • TheAmazingRace 2y ago
      Hence why, if DPR was going to get off somehow, a sentence commutation would have been better rather than an unconditional pardon. The latter implies he did absolutely nothing wrong, which hilariously runs counter to Trump's supposed tough on drugs and crime shtick he has.
    • timewizard 2y ago
      The judge issued the punishment at their sole discretion. The legislature sets the laws often without any input from the constituency. Meanwhile a sizable campaign has materialized around this case and many people do feel he has done enough time and should be free without any restrictions
      • talldayo 2y ago
        > many people do feel he has done enough time and should be free without any restrictions This could be said for any number of people rightfully detained by the US for crimes of incredible magnitude.
        • timewizard 2y ago
          Which is why "jury nullification" still exists. Just because a law exists does not mean the public good is automatically improved by blithely enforcing it with zero tolerance.
• ggm 2y ago
  I don't see how this benefits the American economy, jobs, or national security. I do see that for a cohort of people in the Libertarian community this was held to be a central Tenet: Ulbricht was their "hostage" just as the Proud Boys thought their leader was. But, I can't see how this becomes net beneficial in Congress, or in the wider economy. At best it's providing lower friction movement of goods and services. They tend not to go to Federal Tax collecting exchanges, so I cannot for the life of me see how this helps the exchequer, but maybe thats the point?
• jsphweid 2y ago
  From wikipedia: > "full and unconditional pardon for any crimes related to drugs". Does "any crimes related to drugs" include the murder for hire allegations? Does this mean new charges related to that could be brought against him?
  • zeroonetwothree 2y ago
    Seems like it.
  • hsuduebc2 2y ago
    Wasn't charges about paying a hitmen dropped?
    • jmkni 2y ago
      IIRC it was to do with the conduct of the FBI agents posing as hitmen? I think they ended up in prison too, so a prosecution would be hard.
  • jMyles 2y ago
    Given the farcical nature of those allegations and all that we now know, including that others with access to the Dread Pirate Roberts account assert that the DEA agent making the allegations (who is himself now in prison for attempting to steal some of the silk road bitcoin) had access as well, it will be wonderful if DoJ attempts to bring charges, just to further clear Ross' name. There are not a shred of evidence that Ross ever had the slightest thing to do with those conversations, and it seems much more likely that the DEA used the DPR account to frame him.
• steveBK123 2y ago
  At the same time he is threatening to tariff China 10% due to their responsibility for fentanyl, lol
  • zoklet-enjoyer 2y ago
    Fentanyl wasn't big yet when Silk Road was around. And besides, people were buying straight from China off the clearnet
    • asveikau 2y ago
      I think they're pointing out the hypocrisy of wanting to crack down on drugs while doing this. I see so many Trump adjacent folks demanding we lock up drug dealers, deport them, whatever. But they want to let this one go.
      • steveBK123 2y ago
        Orange man is a classic tough-on-crime guy, very selective what crimes and what demographics of criminals he is tough on.
      • ethagnawl 2y ago
        I see those people in my personal life, too. Ironically, they're also the ones who regularly drive drunk and do a little cocaine now and again because _it doesn't really count_.
    • steveBK123 2y ago
      I think serious jail for running an illegal drug marketplace is good, even if he used lots of neat tech to do so..
    • nozzlegear 2y ago
      Mr. Trump isn't exactly known for making distinctions like that.
    • ethagnawl 2y ago
      I knew people who were wringing it out of medicated patches and sniffing it out of Afrin bottles during high school in the 90s. I also knew someone who ODd and died from tainted/fake pills they bought from one of The Silk Road's (immediate) successors. Some number of people also OD on "traditional" street drugs every day. So, this is really not a sound argument.
• bdhcuidbebe 2y ago
  Will he get his possesions back then? 50,676 bitcoins, today valued at 5,3 billion USD. https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/us-attorney-announces-historic-336-billion-cryptocurrency-seizure-and-conviction https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/us-attorney-announces-h...
  • ktallett 2y ago
    I am not sure of the legality around his possessions but they are long gone. Even the ones stolen by FBI officers during the course of the investigation.
    • mmooss 2y ago
      I think that requires convincing evidence. Also, how is it relevant to the question?
      • ktallett 2y ago
        Well the American Government auctioned the bitcoin, and the two FBI agents were tried and sentenced for theft. I don't need evidence. I am curious how the American government can reimburse those pardoned.
        • mmooss 2y ago
          [flagged]
          • bdhcuidbebe 2y ago
            Its well known and well covered facts regarding this high status case, you even got links in a sibling comment so read them
      • 1123581321 2y ago
        It is easy to look up the cases against the agents. https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/former-federal-agents-charged-bitcoin-money-laundering-and-wire-fraud https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/former-federal-agents-charged... Both served time.
• tayo42 2y ago
  The laws should change too. Legalize and regulate drugs and access.
• steveBK123 2y ago
  [flagged]
  • zoklet-enjoyer 2y ago
    I don't understand how she's not in prison and SBF is
    • steveBK123 2y ago
      Pretty sure she is currently in jail.. if not, she's finished doing the time she was sentenced. Her husband took the fall, whatever the facts actually are, and got a longer sentence. SBF - well the scale, number of laws violated, duration, number of victims, profile of victims, complete lack of contrition, etc would be why he got a much longer sentence.
• zombiwoof 2y ago
  [flagged]
• vvpan 2y ago
  When Snowden, is my question. RFK put a lot of words into "if I am in charge that'll be my first thing". Yeah, he's not the president but he's also not nobody anymore.
  • bbor 2y ago
    NGL it would be pretty funny if Snowden gets to return to the west but we hadn't actually fixed any of the stuff he brought forward in the meantime. Not sure what I would do in his shoes... I guess a pardon is pretty impossible for future presidents to get around, TBF
    • andirk 2y ago
      The courage a lot of these whistleblowers have shown is admirable. How the American public outrages, though: Facebook has targeted ads. How they don't outrage: their government is illegally tracking their own citizens' movements and communications including overseas. Not going to say Ulbricht is a hero like some of the others, but he trail blazed like none before him! And he deserves his freedom years ago.
  • mikrotikker 2y ago
    I'd be worried about the Russians putting him in jail if the US pardoned him.
    • sapiogram 2y ago
      I don't think Putin would want to taint his relationship with Trump on his first week on the White House.
      • Maxious 2y ago
        That doesn't mean that he would want to be seen to be a pushover https://thehill.com/policy/international/5098063-donald-trump-russia-panama-canal/ https://thehill.com/policy/international/5098063-donald-trum...
    • 2y ago
• scudsworth 2y ago
  In one message, Ulbricht informed ELLINGSON that “[the murder target] is a liability and I wouldn't mind if he was executed.” In another message, Ulbricht stated: “[the murder target] is causing me problems . . . I would like to put a bounty on his head if it’s not too much trouble for you. What would be an adequate amount to motivate you to find him?” ELLINGSON responded, “[the p]rice for clean is 300k+ USD,” and the “[p]rice for non-clean is 150-200k USD depending on how you want it done.” ELLINGSON further explained, in part, that “[t]hese prices pay for 2 professional hitters including their travel expenses and work they put in.” Ulbricht later sent ELLINGSON $150,000 worth of Bitcoin to pay for the purported murder. ELLINGSON and Ulbricht agreed on a code to be included with a photograph to prove that the murder had been carried out. In April 2013, ELLINGSON and Ulbricht exchanged messages reflecting that ELLINGSON had sent Ulbricht photographic proof of the murder. A thumbnail of a deleted photograph purporting to depict a man lying on a floor in a pool of blood with tape over his mouth was recovered from Ulbricht’s laptop after his arrest. A piece of paper with the agreed-upon code written on it is shown in the photograph next to the head of the purportedly dead individual. Later in April 2013, ELLINGSON and Ulbricht exchanged additional messages regarding a plot to kill four additional people in Canada. Ulbricht sent ELLINGSON an additional $500,000 worth of Bitcoin for the murders. ELLINGSON claimed to Ulbricht in online messages that the murders had in fact been committed.
  • brcmthrowaway 2y ago
    That is table stakes for Trump
  • holuponemoment 2y ago
    James Ellingson is a convicted federal criminal charged with numerous crimes related to this case. Tasked with investigating Silk Road he ended up in jail himself, along with his co-workers. There's a very good reason none of this stuff ever went to trial, it would be incredibly embarrassing for the agencies involved to see the light of day.
    • scudsworth 2y ago
      im familiar with the case. ross still attempted to hire a killer multiple times.
• loeg 2y ago
  Any non-twitter reporting on this? Edit: https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-pardons-silk-road-founder-ulbricht-online-drug-scheme-2025-01-22/ https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-pardons-silk-road-fou...
  • par 2y ago
    it's in nytimes
  • dredmorbius 2y ago
    Guardian: <https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/21/ross-ulbricht-silk-road-trump-pardon https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/21/ross-ulbrich...> CNN: <https://lite.cnn.com/2025/01/21/politics/silk-road-ross-ulbricht-pardon-trump/index.html https://lite.cnn.com/2025/01/21/politics/silk-road-ross-ulbr...> NPR: <https://www.npr.org/2025/01/21/nx-s1-5270051/trump-pardons-dark-web-marketplace-creator-ross-ulbricht https://www.npr.org/2025/01/21/nx-s1-5270051/trump-pardons-d...> MSN: <https://www.msn.com/en-us/politics/government/trump-pardons-ross-ulbricht-creator-of-silk-road/ar-AA1xCmJv https://www.msn.com/en-us/politics/government/trump-pardons-...> Reuters: <https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-pardons-silk-road-founder-ulbricht-online-drug-scheme-2025-01-22/ https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-pardons-silk-road-fou...> AP: <https://www.msn.com/en-us/politics/government/trump-pardons-founder-of-silk-road-website/ar-AA1xCO5W https://www.msn.com/en-us/politics/government/trump-pardons-...>
    • yieldcrv 2y ago
      and Truth Social honestly guys, its time to download Truth Social so you can see what the President and the right is really saying by the time it hits your feeds elsewhere, it is often times altered just to inflame you and whatever segment of the algorithm's tree you are already pigeonholed in
  • Cub3 2y ago
    It seems a lot of reddit communities are starting to block xitter as it's painful to use now without an account. Should HN do the same?
• nikolay 2y ago
  Trump freed him because libertarians voted for him - he openly said so. Meanwhile, he's waging a war on fentanyl! He should've freed Snowden instead.
• insane_dreamer 2y ago
  Interesting. I wonder who pushed Trump to do this. Gotta be Musk. Who else?
  • zeroonetwothree 2y ago
    The LP presumably
• jazzyjackson 2y ago
  Obligatory "This is good for bitcoin"
• rappatic 2y ago
  I think his original sentence was absolutely deserved—even though the charge of hiring a contract killer to assassinate his business competition may have been dropped, I think it's clear he did many things in the same vein. Even if you support his original pursuit of a free and open online marketplace, I think most people would agree he took it a bridge too far in the end. That said, I do think he absolutely deserved to be released, not because he didn't deserve to be locked up in the first place, but because he's clearly been rehabilitated and has done great work during his time in prison. All that considered, ten years seems like a not unreasonable prison sentence for what he did. I hope he'll continue to do good when he's released.
  • outside415 2y ago
    [flagged]
  • nadermx 2y ago
    What has always sat odd with me regarding this, is we don't truly know the extent of the fbi's corruption in this. They stole, so it's not hard to imagine they planted evidence too.
    • mplewis 2y ago
      What evidence would you have even needed to plant? He ran the largest internet drug market and openly tried to assassinate a competitor.
      • TheAmazingRace 2y ago
        Agreed. He willingly engaged with the alleged hitman (which ended up being the FBI contact). He didn't need to do anything or not have the thought to murder others cross his mind.
        • andirk 2y ago
          Allegedly. The 2 rules of his Fight Club were no underage sex stuff and no physical harm. That hitman claim was not part of his charges or sentencing. The heavy sentencing was to like "send a message" the judge said.
• npvrite 2y ago
  A. His prison sentence was totalitarian and three letters stole his crypto and illegally convicted him. B. Orange is not a hero. I don't bow down to Kim Jong Un/Hitler wannabees. C. Tor is a three letter honeypot.
  • GasVeteran 2y ago
    [dead]
  • cbg0 2y ago
    [citation needed] on those items
• spaceguillotine 2y ago
  [flagged]
  • steveBK123 2y ago
    Crypto oligarchs calling the shots in The Bronzer Strikes Back.
• wolfgang42 2y ago
  Tangentially related: I had the disconcerting experience of reading a Wired article about his arrest[1] while unknowingly sitting about six feet from the spot where he was apprehended. When I read that the FBI agents had stopped at Bello Coffee while preparing their stakeout, I thought, huh, interesting coincidence, I just had a coffee there. Then Ulbricht walked into the public library and sat down at the table directly in front of me, and suddenly as I was reading I could look up and see exactly the chair he had been in, where the plainclothes police had positioned themselves, how they had arranged a distraction. Having this tableau unexpectedly unfold right in front of my eyes was a fascinating experience, and it certainly made the article suddenly get a lot more immersive! [1] https://www.wired.com/2015/05/silk-road-2/ https://www.wired.com/2015/05/silk-road-2/ EDIT: to be clear, I was not present for the arrest. I was reading the magazine, some years after the arrest, but in the same place as the arrest. (I didn’t qualify the events with “I read that...” since I thought the narrative ellipsis would be obvious from context; evidently not.)
  • cush 2y ago
    Before I got to the edit I was convinced you were in The Neverending Story
  • paulsutter 2y ago
    Wait, you were reading about his arrest while he was being arrested? That article was written after his conviction?
    • deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    • j-bos 2y ago
      He first read the article while sitting where Ulbricht was when Ulbricht was arrested.
    • EricRiese 2y ago
      Plot twist: wolfgang42 is Ulbricht
• mrandish 2y ago
  This is wonderful. I've never argued that Ross shouldn't have served time but it's always been clear his prosecution and sentencing were excessive and unjust. The prosecutors asked for a 20 year sentence, which seemed disproportionate given the sentencing guidelines for a first-time offender and the non-violent charges he was convicted of. But the judge sentenced Ross to TWO life sentences plus 40 years - without the possibility of parole. There's no doubt Ross made a series of unwise and reckless decisions but serving over ten years of hard time in a FedMax prison is more than enough given the charges and his history. It's just unfortunate that Trump, and now, excessive pardons are politically polarized, which could cloud the fact that justice was done today. I don't credit Trump in any way for doing "the right thing" or even having a principled position regarding Ross' case. Clearly, others with influence on Trump convinced him to sign it. It doesn't matter how the pardon happened. Biden should have already pardoned Ross because that crazy sentence shouldn't have happened in the first place.
  • arp242 2y ago
    > Biden should have already pardoned Ross because that crazy sentence shouldn't have happened in the first place. Biden did commute the sentence of several other non-violent cases just last week or thereabouts, and Trump has been talking about Ulbricht for quite some time so it's not a complete surprise. I guess the whole "murder for hire" thing excluded him from the "non-violent" category. But how that got tacked on seems very odd; the judge basically said "we didn't really handle it in the court case and it wasn't a charge, but it was mentioned a few times and it seemed basically true, so I included it in the sentencing". Like, ehh, okay? To be honest, I don't really understand much of the logic ("logic") of the US justice system....
    • mrandish 2y ago
      Judges are allowed to consider some evidence during sentencing which was not presented at trial. The standard for this evidence is lower than the "beyond a shadow of doubt" standard required for a criminal conviction. This is allowed because during sentencing the judge is considering information related to the history and character of the defendant. The 'hiring an online hitman' (who was an FBI informant) allegation was never charged or tried. Even if it hadn't been obvious entrapment, it might well have evaporated under discovery and cross-examination by a competent defense. Including such evidence in sentencing consideration is not uncontroversial in the U.S. However, it can cut both ways, in that a judge can consider extenuating circumstances in a defendant's life to reduce sentencing. We want judges to evaluate cases and make sentencing adjustments where appropriate. So, I don't think I'd do away with the practice. The real issue is that this specific judge went absolutely bonkers far beyond the 20 years the prosecution asked for during sentencing (which was already very high) and sentenced Ross to two life sentences plus 40 years without parole. Most of us who are happy that Ross was pardoned agree that he was guilty and deserved a jail sentence for the crimes he was convicted of. The only problem is the sentence was so wildly excessive for a non-violent, first-time offender. Compared to guidelines and other sentences it was just crazy and wrong. Ross has served over ten years. Now he's free. That's probably about right.
• unit149 2y ago
  [dead]
• ricochet11 2y ago
  those thinking this is a criminal who shouldn’t be released i recommend reading this thread https://x.com/tayvano_/status/1641931312385888256 https://x.com/tayvano_/status/1641931312385888256
• xyst 2y ago
  [flagged]
  • k3vinw 2y ago
    Hyperbole much? I for one am happy that these Americans who were politically targeted and serving 4 years of prison time especially for the violent crime of trespassing have been giving their lives back. The message is clear: don’t weaponize the American justice system against its own citizens. And Biden just commuted the sentences of mass murderers and child killers. What kind of message does that send?
• ionwake 2y ago
  [flagged]
  • darknavi 2y ago
    Not going to try and sway you here but to learn more, read or listen to "American Kingpin: The Epic Hunt for the Criminal Mastermind Behind the Silk Road". Truly fascinating story and good story telling.
    • ionwake 2y ago
      yeah I only know a limited amount, but I found the sentence to be super harsh at the time for a website owner and as we can see form all the comments, the fact he got punished so harshly has implications on ycombinator as well most of the poeple here are website owner. I wont watch your video as it clearly is a hit piece by the title. If it had just had an impartial "An investigation into Ross" then I would have. The fact you suggested a video source with a clearly biased source make me think less of your argument. EDIT> Also I am not sure if you downvoted me, I upvoted you as I appreciate your time in sharing your view. thanks.
      • darknavi 2y ago
        The book is from the perspectives of Ross and from the main FBI (I think?) agent investigating him. It didn't seem much like a "hit" piece to me.
  • arp242 2y ago
    Aaron tried to give the world free access to information for no personal gain. Ross ran an online marketplace for drugs and other illegal materials for personal profit. The life sentence was ridiculous, but they're not he same at all. It's the difference between Chelsea Manning or Snowden leaking state secrets and someone who sells on state secrets to the Russians or Chinese.
    • ionwake 2y ago
      I think thats a biased answer and strawman argument. He made a platform where anything coudl be sold as he was a libertarian. It actually echoes what the ethos of hackernews is, to build a product everyone uses. He didnt sell anything, so your metaphor doesn't correlate at all. Also Aaron las literally a CEO of a company. Im not complaining about Aaron, he did have higher thoughts on how to help society but my point was about entrepeneurship. If you want to come onto a ycombinator forum and say "hey this website creator was bad", then argue the case without comparing him to "user" of the site, which was my pretty simple point. Otherwise you just make yourself look bad. I do not agree with his behaviour, I am saying he made a site, and got into trouble because of what happened on it. This sets a precedent that affects startup entrepeneur. Its a simple concept I am discussing. So dont strawman this. I want you to convince me, but if you need to be logical.
• yapyap 2y ago
  finally! let’s go! though he was very stupid with how he did it, I am happy he is a free man
  • foogazi 2y ago
    Wait, is he smart or stupid ?
• yapyap 2y ago
  I am surprised Trump pardoned him, not unhappy bout it tho!
• deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
• foogazi 2y ago
  How are cartels terrorist organizations but online drug markets are not illegal ?
  • presentation 2y ago
    They aren't illegal?
  • ricardonunez 2y ago
    The difference is the terrorizing and beheading part.
• wnevets 2y ago
  [flagged]
• UltraSane 2y ago
  Presidents and governors should NOT have the power to pardon people. And if they do it should be ONE pardon per term.
  • dylan604 2y ago
    Until you can prove to me that all courts, judges, attorneys, and juries are above reproach and no innocent people are imprisoned there absolutely should be a method for someone to pardon. Sometimes a pardon will be issued for people you disagree with, but that’s part of it. Just like somebody will say something that pisses you off, but that’s the cost of free speech
    • UltraSane 2y ago
      A single person should never have the sole power to undo an unlimited number of lawful convictions. It seems like a power designed for corruption.
      • eviks 2y ago
        is the power to put people in prison designed for corruption? And if so, should it be limited to a max of 1 person / judge / term?
        • UltraSane 2y ago
          The court system has a LOT more checks than one man's whims
      • dylan604 2y ago
        you say lawful convictions, but yet have not provided any evidence of all convictions being lawful. we absolutely know that people have been wrongly imprisoned. but at this point i feel like i'm talking to a 3month old bot
        • UltraSane 2y ago
• santoshalper 2y ago
  Disclosure - I immensely dislike Trump and think Ross Ublricht deserved to be convicted. That said - There is no evidence that anyone was ever killed, there is pretty thin evidence that he actually ever intended to hire any hitmen (though he may have defrauded people who thought they were hiring hitmen), and a life sentence for non-violent drug trafficking seems draconian. I certainly don't think this should have been one of Trump's priorities (I'm guessing it came through Vance, Musk, or someone else in the crypto community), but I don't have a big problem with it.
• deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
• DaveExeter 2y ago
  [flagged]
• PKop 2y ago
  Since no one is posting it, here's Trump Truth Social post on the matter: "I just called the mother of Ross William Ulbricht to let her know that in honor of her and the Libertarian Movement, which supported me so strongly, it was my pleasure to have just signed a full and unconditional pardon of her son, Ross. The scum that worked to convict him were some of the same lunatics who were involved in the modern day weaponization of government against me. He was given two life sentences, plus 40 years. Ridiculous!"
• mmaunder 2y ago
  I wonder if Assange will get the pardon he’s campaigning for: https://www.action.assangecampaign.org.au/ https://www.action.assangecampaign.org.au/
  • dynamite-ready 2y ago
    I'd wager the chances of that happening are much lower under this current administration. Surprised Biden didn't consider it though.
    • toyg 2y ago
      Neither Obama nor Biden would ever pardon Assange, because it would not win them any votes with the constituencies they are really after. At least Manning carried some trans votes.
• janniehater 2y ago
  [dead]
• sidcool 2y ago
  I'm indifferent to him being pardoned. But people saying he didn't deserve any punishment seems weird to me.
  • blast 2y ago
    To me too. But life without parole seemed weird as well.
    • sophacles 2y ago
      That's why commutation is a thing. The courts have ruled this as within the pardon powers. His sentence could be changed to reflect something much more aligned with other convictions for the same crimes.
      • dmix 2y ago
        Commutation is not considered during sentencing or mandatory minimums or anything like that. It's only an option for very popular cases and even then it's rare.
        • kortilla 2y ago
          No, op is saying Trump could have commuted the sentence rather than wiping the whole thing out
          • Bluescreenbuddy 2y ago
            A presidential pardon doesn't "Wipe anything out". It's still on your record. It's not expunged
            • kortilla 2y ago
              It’s not expunged but you have a letter from the president saying you shouldn’t have been convicted in the first place. The meaning is different even thought the legal outcomes are the same. https://www.msnbc.com/deadline-white-house/deadline-legal-blog/trump-jan-6-pardons-commuted-rcna188630 https://www.msnbc.com/deadline-white-house/deadline-legal-bl... A president will still commute when they think you did do something wrong but were unjustly punished.
• underseacables 2y ago
  I thought it was a ridiculously long sentence compared to what other people have received. 10 years was right. That's enough time. I know that he was accused of hiring a hitman, but he was never convicted of that. It should have never been used in his sentencing. I think the government tried to make an example out of Ross Ulbrich, and it was a miscarriage of justice.
  • YPPH 2y ago
    The solution is a commutation, not a pardon.
• deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
• scop 2y ago
  [dead]
• ldehaan 2y ago
  [dead]
• MPSFounder 2y ago
  These discussions are very interesting. So many red flags from Trump (this pardon, ending birthright citizenship...), and people try to justify these things. America is unfortunately heading for a very dark time. Politics aside, I am rather uncomfortable with the power the president possesses. We were always mindful that there are systems of checks and balances. However, given the current court overturned a precedent (Roe), I am unsure what the future holds. This pardon makes me very uneasy.
• sidibe 2y ago
  The sympathy for this guy from so many of you makes me sad. The messages show he wanted and thought he was getting people murdered. But that's perfectly OK because it was actually the evil FBI he was talking to!
  • 77pt77 2y ago
    Surely you must understand that he was also white and solid middle class. And he was able to code sloppy LAMP code.
    • sidibe 2y ago
      Ah I hadn't seen his photo. Could have been me after a night of drinking, lets not ruin the poor guys life just because of a few callous decisions.
• yalogin 2y ago
  Is SBF next in line for a pardon?
  • insane_dreamer 2y ago
    SBF lost a lot of money for a lot of rich people; he's not getting off so easy as someone selling illegal drugs and ordering hits on competitors
• nostromo 2y ago
  I think the attacks on some of these black and gray markets has increased violent crime in the real world. I wish the federal government would stop shutting them down and instead use them as tools to build cases against people breaking the law. For example, for a while most prostitution and sex work seemed to be online, on places like Craigslist right next to ads for used furniture and jobs. And it seemed to be really effective in getting prostitutes off the streets. Now that those markets were shut down, I'm seeing here in Seattle we're having pimp shootouts on Aurora and the prostitutes are more brazen than ever. Going after Craigslist has had a negative effect on our cities and has increased crime, and I suspect going after SilkRoad has had a similar impact.
  • bloudermilk 2y ago
    I don't think much changed, really. The contraband and services offered on these marketplaces has always been backed by criminal enterprises. Mostly the markets provided level of indirection that made purchasing palatable and gave a false sense of safety.
    • anon84873628 2y ago
      Sure, but the point is about secondary effects. If pimps are "competing" online then they need to compete on, well, marketing and UX. If they compete in real life then it is about who controls physical territory. There are lots of studies about the unintended consequences of prohibition.
    • joe_the_user 2y ago
      Online markets for sex work allowed women to operate far more safely than "the street" allow. I had friends who were affected by the crackdown on craigslist etc.
      • bloudermilk 2y ago
        I sincerely didn't mean to minimize the harm to sex workers, which is devastating. My point is rather that an online marketplace in the absence of decriminalization and reform can only provide a marginal increase in safety. Sex workers marketing on Backpage, Craigslist, Onlyfans, and IG still face a great deal of risk of violence, pressure from pimps, and prosecution by law enforcement. It's a deeply complex systematic issue which can't be fixed by a website. For drugs in particular, darknet marketplaces primarily rely on unspeakably violent criminal enterprises upstream. The consumers, sellers, and communities implicated in this supply chain are all losers in this system. The cartels are the winners and the global "war on drugs" establishment are a close second place.
• insane_dreamer 2y ago
  So does this mean the war on drugs is finally over and we're going to stop mass incarceration for non-violent drug offenses? If so, that _would_ be good news.
  • ecocentrik 2y ago
    He also just classified drug cartels as terrorist organizations so drug dealers are now technically facilitating terrorism. Apart from liberating this white collar drug dealer, all of his other actions have escalated the war on drugs. While he was signing these orders, he claimed that drug cartels were responsible for up to 300,000 American deaths annually (a completely fabricated number.)
    • mr_00ff00 2y ago
      https://www.bop.gov/inmates/fsa/overview.jsp https://www.bop.gov/inmates/fsa/overview.jsp Feel like you have already made up your mind on what you want to believe, but he has actually helped a lot with non-violent drug offenders. That’s part of the reason poor communities (especially Latino) have voted for him despite harsh border policies.
      • ecocentrik 2y ago
        Justice reform is generally positive for the country and not just individual cultural groups. I just don't expect those reforms to apply to drug offenders when so many of his supporters seems like they are seeking retribution for the loss of loved ones that killed themselves with drugs to the extent that they celebrate calls to bomb neighboring countries. I don't think we're going to see clear messaging on this from Trump.
      • insane_dreamer 2y ago
        Trump also said anyone caught selling drugs should get the death penalty, so take your pick. https://reason.com/2023/10/24/trump-who-freed-drug-offenders-also-wants-to-kill-them/ https://reason.com/2023/10/24/trump-who-freed-drug-offenders...
  • 2y ago
• olalonde 2y ago
  I wonder if the decision to drop the "murder for hire" charges was originally influenced by his existing life sentence, and whether the pardon now alters that reasoning. Is it still possible for him to be prosecuted on those charges?
  • aksss 2y ago
    I think they were dismissed with prejudice, which if true, is a “no”. That said, all prior charges and attempts were federal charges, and nothing in a pardon or federal dismissal prevents an individual state from bringing charges, IIRC. Would be a heavy lift though without cooperation from feds to turn over investigation materials.
• imaginationra 2y ago
  [flagged]
  • croes 2y ago
    two wrongs don't make a right
• cratermoon 2y ago
  Just a reminder: the condition for accepting a pardon is acknowledging that you did commit the crime in question and accept the court's finding of guilt. In contrast: Biden didn't pardon Leonard Peltier, the president commuted his sentence. Peltier maintains his innocence.
  • johnneville 2y ago
    Can you share more about your first point? A brief search shows the 1915 Burdick supreme court case said that accepting a pardon can imply guilt. However, it doesn't seem to say that acknowledgement or acceptance of guilt is a requirement by the recipient of the pardon.
  • plsbenice34 2y ago
    Do you have a source for that condition? How does that work for Biden pardoning Fauci for crimes that havent been revealed yet?
    • cratermoon 2y ago
      classic whataboutism.
      • throwaway314155 2y ago
        > cLAsSIc WhATAbOuTiSm tl;dr? Cratermoon cannot in fact cite a source for their claims. This sort of shit is why people can't reasonably trust accusations of logical fallacy on the internet. You can't just yell whataboutism whenever you don't want to answer challenging questions.
        • cratermoon 2y ago
          Hmm, good point. Maybe it wasn't whataboutism. It could just as well be sealioning.
      • plsbenice34 2y ago
        I was just trying to understand how it works, because the way presidential pardons work is bizarre to me. The pre-emptive pardons seem even more bizarre if what you say is correct. I wasn't trying to engage in an argument. I do feel sceptical about whether you are correct, but i wouldnt know since i barely know anything about it at all.
• deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
• smashah 2y ago
  All I can think about after reading this is "Rest In Power Aaron Swartz"
• spiritplumber 2y ago
  Legalities aside, is it more evil to hire a dude to kill your enemy, or to go kill your enemy yourself? (I'd go with the former because if you go kill your enemy yourself you're at least accepting that it may go the other way).
• southernplaces7 2y ago
  For all his many defects and cloudy motives for doing it, Trump deserves applause for this. It's with actions such as this that he also shows why he's a genuine maverick of a president, with who it's genuinely possible to expect deeply unexpected actions (for better or worse). For all his talk of being progressive and cultivation of a youthful maverick image of his own, you would have never seen such a move from Obama and forget about it under the mealy mouthed Biden or a hypothetical Hillary administration. With Trump, rather uniquely and singularly, it happened. Ulbricht made many mistakes, less so morally but definitely legally, of the kind with which he could have expected to cause punishment to rain down upon him, but the way in which his case was managed and the way in which he was sentenced truly were both disgusting in numerous ways. They were classic examples of prosecutorial and political vengeance and give much truth to Trump's own description of the same as "The scum that worked to convict him were some of the same lunatics who were involved in the modern day weaponization of government against me. He was given two life sentences, plus 40 years. Ridiculous!” If you in any way mistrust heavy-handed government prosecutions and persecutions, it's hard to disagree much, even if it's also not hard to imagine Trump being just as abusive in other contexts where prosecution of enemies would suit his interests and personal vengeance. Now if we see him pardon Snowden too, i'd happily give a standing ovation. Before someone here smugly chimes in about how Ulbricht also tried to hire out a murder by contract, bear in mind that this accusation was riddled with holes, suspicions of entrapment and in any case wasn't formally used for his sentencing, AND still wouldn't justify the kind of onerously grotesque sentence that was dumped on him. Pedophiles who committed child murders have been sentenced to less than Ulbricht was.
  • yownie 2y ago
    >For all his talk of being progressive and cultivation of a youthful maverick image of his own, you would have never seen such a move from Obama he pardoned Chelsea Manning I think you're forgetting.
  • dimator 2y ago
    the fact that he will never pardon Snowden tells you all you need to know: this pardon was pandering and suits his own purposes. there are no higher principles here besides quid pro quo.
• agentultra 2y ago
  Is this president extremely concerned about drug dealers and gangs in the US? Why is he pardoning a drug trafficker?
  • smt88 2y ago
    I understand your point, but it has become a waste of energy to try to point out hypocridy and ideological inconsistency among that group. It's better to ignore the rational reasons to oppose them and focus on the emotional ones. For starters, people are repulsed by their cruelty.
    • krige 2y ago
      I disagree, the lukewarm emotion driven campaign ("we're not the other guy!") and lack of any rational strategy or arguments from the oppositon is how these people won in the first place.
      • noisy_boy 2y ago
        Appeal to emotions stands on the trustworthiness/track record of the pleader. The opposition, full of public/private office musical chair players, has been in the pocket of lobbyists/corporate interests - they don't have any standing to plead to emotions (not saying the incumbents do but they have been successful in harnessing their already enraged supporters).
        • PartiallyTyped 2y ago
          Pleading to emotion works only if the target audience is not ideologically possessed, and by ideologically, I mean that they hate the mere thought of voting democrat even if they support the democrat’s agenda. The Democrat agenda has far far higher approval ratings than Democrats, and that says a lot about the current state of affairs.
          • noisy_boy 2y ago
• unobatbayar 2y ago
  Words can't describe how happy I am.
• RomanPushkin 2y ago
  Explain to me like to five year old why when I create a _successful_ drug marketplace that sold whole bunch of illegal drugs should be pardoned?
• arittr 2y ago
  Now that I didn’t expect
• xeckr 2y ago
  Good.
• liamwire 2y ago
  Genuinely thought we’d never see the day. My feelings on Ulbricht are mixed and have evolved over the decade he’s been in prison. However, the Silk Road allowed me to try LSD as an 18 year old in a safe(r) way than those that came before me.* It was those experiences that revealed I’d been depressed most of my life, and that it also didn’t have to be that way, by way of experiencing what that would feel like. I went on to seek new experiences, make new friends for the first time in my life, engage with professional mental health support, went to university, and started multiple businesses. It also introduced my staunchly-atheist self to the experience of spiritual/transcendental experiences, and how those can exist separately from, and don’t require, belief in deities or religion. It can’t be said where I’d have wound up without those experiences, but my own understanding of myself feels pivotally tied to something I couldn’t have gone through without Ross’ actions. Still, I acknowledge it appears more likely that not he tried to have people killed, and regardless of the circumstances surrounding this, that is condemnable. *Had it not been for an anonymous group at the time, The LSD Avengers, posting reviews using gas chromatography mass-spectrometry and reagent tests of suppliers on the site, I wouldn’t have had the confidence to take the risk of trying what I’d received. LSD is physiologically safe, not to say anything of any psychological risks, but knowing the dose allowed me to enter into the shallow end of the pool, so to speak. Common substitutes however cannot have the same said of them. If I’d lived in a time and place that allowed for state-funded drug testing (something my own state has in fact recently abolished despite wildly successful trials), perhaps things would’ve not required a Ross Ulbricht to exist in my case, but I see this as a failure of the system and of drug prohibition as a whole. Ross would’ve existed one way or another I believe, for better or worse, by another name, had he chosen another path. Now he gets the chance to try his life again. I felt the same way.
  • clutchdude 2y ago
    Question - did you need drugs such as LSD to have that experience or did it lower the barrier to entry?
    • liamwire 2y ago
      Great question, I’m not sure about the answer. I’ve heard those that meditate describe similar experiences, and have had some profound perspective shifts trying it myself years ago. I can’t also rule out the age I was at the time, being one where’d you’d expect to go through new and transformative experiences anyway by virtue of still growing and maturing. But my intuition says no, it really does feel like those were peak, pivotal experiences that still stand out as some of the most significant in my life. Not to say it’s not possible, but maybe more so that in my little corner of the world with the relatively limited experiences available to me at the time, I’m not sure I wouldn’t have simply continued to tread the very uninspired life path I was on. In a way it felt like waking up in the middle of a dream, and realising I could go back to sleep, or get up and change my circumstances. Probably a bit of a cringe analogy, but it feels about right — it was still work and a conscious choice to make positive changes, but prior to then it hadn’t even occurred to me that I could. It’s not lost on me that for positive stories like mine, there’s many people that could counter with negatives. Drugs aren’t safe, but neither is a life unchallenged I think. In my case that was what I needed I suspect, a challenge to my own views on myself, other people, the world, and what’s possible. Therapy might’ve gotten me there too, for all it’s worth, but I don’t know that I would’ve considered it prior.
• jMyles 2y ago
  It's baffling to me that there are actually comments on Hacker Gosh Darn News of all places suggesting that Ross justly belonged in prison. He successfully created a tool to undermine one of the most unjust and predatory policies of the US State - the policy of drug prohibition. He's a damn hero. I don't understand why Trump, who most of the time seems like a simply awful human being with no end of appetite for state power, has chosen to do this, but I'll certainly take it. It's beyond obvious that voting and other mechanics of representative rule have not succeeded at simple policy change such as ending prohibition. I look forward to several decades of truth trumping power in the form of the internet undermining states, until the asinine mode of political organization known as the nation state is deprecated entirely.
  • robertlagrant 2y ago
    It's hard to know why he wouldn't - he conspired to have people killed, and facilitated illegal activity, i.e. the sale of all sorts of drugs. You might be saying "well, drugs shouldn't be illegal", or even, "well, conspiring to kill people shouldn't be illegal", but they were illegal at the time.
    • starspangled 2y ago
      Seems like a legal slight-of-hand, and also unjust and unethical and absolutely ripe for government abuse. He was punished for the crime of attempting or conspiring to commit murder. Without ever having been found guilty in a trial by jury of his peers determining beyond reasonable doubt that the facts met said crime.
• Whatarethese 2y ago
  Hope he goes on Dark Net Diaries.
• amac 2y ago
  The right decision.
• nodesocket 2y ago
  Ross just posted this photo on X. Man served 10 years, time for him to be free. https://x.com/Free_Ross/status/1881925029497377104 https://x.com/Free_Ross/status/1881925029497377104
• nullbyte808 2y ago
  I regret not voting for Trump. Hopefully most of his BS will be contested and the good stuff he does sticks.
• pjbeam 2y ago
  DPR is free!! I'm very happy for him and hope he makes good on this second lease on life.
• andsoitis 2y ago
  Ross Ulbricht on X: https://x.com/realrossu https://x.com/realrossu
  • presentation 2y ago
    If you're wondering like I was why he is able to tweet from prison, this article explains that he's dictating tweets via phone to his family, and they are sending back comments to him via mail. [1] [1] https://news.sophos.com/en-us/2018/08/16/silk-road-founder-ross-ulbricht-is-dictating-tweets-from-prison/ https://news.sophos.com/en-us/2018/08/16/silk-road-founder-r...
• metadat 2y ago
  I wonder if this action was executed at the suggestion of Mr. Musk? It seems questionable Trump even understands or cares what Silk Road did or how it worked.
• DrFunke 2y ago
  I laundered money on The Silkroad (sent birthday cards filled with cash for bitcoin). It was a level of criminality I was fairly comfortable with. I do retain some fear that my door would be kicked in some day. Lawyers of HN, Am I in the clear now too? Ross tried to have a guy murdered, after all.
  • beeflet 2y ago
    That depends, did you send the cards on their birthday? IANAL, but I think you should be in the clear as long as you left a big red lipstick kiss on the bottom of the card.
• palad1n 2y ago
  I can’t believe Trump did something right. If Harris were prez he’d be languishing there till who knows when.
• upmind 2y ago
  Was there anything said about pardoning Snowden?
• notananthem 2y ago
  This thread really shows how unhinged the community is. Dude hired contract killers and ran the most prolific darkweb forum for whatever. He's not some martyr. He's just a bum.
• rib3ye 2y ago
  It's very hard to square his sentencing. If he had been running an IRL drug and gun facilitation marketplace in my city, I would have said 20 years was appropriate. But when the feds make it a techno-political issue, I feel the urge to push back.
• deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
• belter 2y ago
  May I respectfully and humbly suggest to this community to avoid posting Twitter links?
  • weberer 2y ago
    People have been fighting that uphill battle for close to 10 years now. I don't see it happening.
    • dewey 2y ago
      This is the first time I’ve seen it and in the pre-Elon years there was also not much reason to do that. I don’t think the perception was bad more than > 5 years ago.
  • sherburt3 2y ago
    What's wrong with twitter links?
    • belter 2y ago
      First you can only read if you create an account, second its owned by this person: https://preview.redd.it/vpt4ycl43eee1.gif?width=480&format=mp4&s=c1a798d43430c807cadb69df4ea3d454e9a5b0c2 https://preview.redd.it/vpt4ycl43eee1.gif?width=480&format=m...
      • sherburt3 2y ago
        Well we wouldn't want those dirty twitter links to affect the ideological purity of HN
        • belter 2y ago
          Arguing over tabs vs. spaces is petty; arguing over 'Mein Kampf' is indefensible.
• deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
• Prbeek 2y ago
  Fantastic news for the guy probably responsible for the wide adoption of bitcoin. I hope curl php no longer troubles him.
• pavlov 2y ago
  The US constitution increasingly seems like the principles of the Roman Republic after Caesar — a quaint relic that gets regular ceremonial lip service but provides no checks and balances on the leaders. Presidents of both parties abuse pardon power with monarchic glee. The president now has full immunity. The incoming president and his wife launched crypto-tokens whose only utility is to allow foreigners to send billions of dollars to them anonymously (of course with full identification of the buyer in private communications thanks to the crypto private key, so you can be sure of who sent the bribe). People are obviously tired and overwhelmed. It's hard to pay attention because Trump has recently threatened so much more: invading foreign allies, military trials for political opponents, using the army against citizens, and so on. When he carries through with just 20% of what he said, it's supposed to be no big deal. But the institutions and norms are destroyed and they don't magically come back if the other party wins.
• decentralised 2y ago
  This is just. If a president can pardon people preemptively then they can pardon someone retroactively as well.
• fbnlsr 2y ago
  This might be a minor thing, but does anyone know if a full pardon will allow him to use an electronic device or access the internet? Often times, people convicted of crimes related to an online activity are forbidden this right, and I wonder if that's the case for him, and if so, what his life would be in this day and age.
  • ropejumper 2y ago
    With a full pardon it's as if he never did anything in the first place.
    • WrongAssumption 2y ago
      That’s an expungement, which is not a power the president has. He can grant a pardon, which is forgiveness, but does not erase that a crime was committed.
      • ropejumper 2y ago
        You're right, but I meant the consequences for him from this point on, which are essentially as if he hadn't done anything.
• sharpesttool 2y ago
  Hard to square the circle with this. Trump is against China's drug imports (and more generally China's imports), but releases someone convicted of running a "import some drugs from China" business because... well crypto money. Oh money that's it. No contradiction!
  • dredmorbius 2y ago
    There is no circle. There is no square. There is unbridled and unanchored self-interest, power-lust, and opportunists.
• lbriner 2y ago
  Someone might have already pointed it out but for me, the sentence of RA is not the main issue, the issue is allowing a single person to stamp through an entire legal system and undermine all of the time and money that is invested in it, even if that person is a president. I suspect that the idea originally was to give some safety valve but if it is used more than a few times by a President, it makes a mockery of it and it should be removed as a power. How can a President ever decide that the entire legal process is flawed and their opinion is right? If the sentence was too long then change the sentencing guidelines.
  • tonymet 2y ago
    Is this a complaint about Trump or Biden ? So far Biden has pardoned more than 20x Trump , and Bidens recipients were Much more controversial
  • varsketiz 2y ago
    I tend to think this way about ideal leadership, but in reality big systems I can see end up having exception paths, or even processes
  • contravariant 2y ago
    The main failure here is the failure of the elections system to elect anyone reasonable. On its own it is not that bad an idea for someone who carries a mandate of the majority of the population to be able to grant pardons.
    • kortilla 2y ago
      All of the presidents pardon tons of people unpalatable to the other side of the political spectrum. They usually just save it for the end of their term so it doesn’t cause too much noise.
      • ArnoVW 2y ago
        While it is true that there is always controversy, this does not mean that there is equivalency. Yes, every president has pardons that are arguable (Biden pardoning his son, for example). And anyone pardoned has been found guilty of a crime, by definition. But not all crimes are equal. Pardoning 1500 people that participated in a (luckily failed) insurrection that caused 5 deaths and 100+ injured, is an extremely bad precedent, and sends a very bad signal. Pardoning people convicted of marijuana possession (like Biden did) is not the same thing as pardoning the head of the worlds biggest guns and drugs marketplace. Even if he did not kill anyone himself (it was proven, just to a lesser extent, but fine). Those drugs and guns most definitely did kill people.
• gigatexal 2y ago
  So are online illegal drug marketplaces legal now if they’re run entirely on crypto?
• leftcenterright 2y ago
  A full unconditional pardon is one thing, reduction of sentence through judicial processes is another. He never pardoned Snowden and Assange . Why do they still have courts in the US again?
• karel-3d 2y ago
  Silk Road 3.0 here we come! (Silk Road 2.0 already existed. The guy running it is in prison now, I think.) edit: ah seems Silk Road 3.0 existed too. So, 4.0 then
• freehorse 2y ago
  So Trump keeps his promises to the ones who supported him. Makes one think how what other promises he has made to other people and groups having funded and supported his campaign.
• omnibrain 2y ago
  Who's next? Sam Bankman-Fried or Elizabeth Holmes?
  • dead_gunslinger 2y ago
    These ones are left for the next Democrat administration, current one is probably hostile to them given their political leanings.
• JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  We need pardon reform. I’d argue the President should not be allowed to issue pardons that are: (1) Preëmptive (i.e. absent conviction); (2) To himself, his current or former Cabinet members, or to any of the foregoing’s current or former spouses or children or grandchildren (or their spouses); or (3) Issued after the presidential election in the final year of their term. Furthermore, pardons for violent offences or corruption should be prohibited; provided, however, the President should retain the power to commute such sentences, and the Congress should have the power to regulate the manner in which the President may commute such sentences. (Notably, I don’t believe this would apply to Ulbricht. He wasn’t convicted of a violent crime.)
  • tallanvor 2y ago
    While I would tend to agree with the first one, and preventing someone from pardoning himself or herself, the rest is a bit much. But it's a moot point anyway. At this point amending the constitution is virtually impossible.
    • JumpCrisscross 2y ago
      > the rest is a bit much The Cabinet or the lame-duck pardons? Cabinet members are close to the President and in commanding positions of authority; if they’re scared of a law they should work to change it. Lame ducks, on the other hand, aren’t subject to the single veneer of a check on Presidential pardons: popular outrage. Limiting it in that span, when a President is unaccountable, and where we have ample history of silliness, seems warranted. Note that I’m not proposing restricting commutations in any of those cases. (I suppose we should add a clause prohibiting the President from preëmptive commutations, too.) > amending the constitution is virtually impossible Not true. We’re probably closer to the end of our Constitutional stasis than at any time in our lives. Hell, you might be able to ram something like this through today if you added a clause that nullifies past pardons per those standards.
      • deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
• mschuster91 2y ago
  Nothing better showing how much Twitter has utterly degenerated than a gold checkmarked scam account (letter confusion) as the top reply [1]. [1] https://x.com/Frecs_Ross/status/1881968595632377962 https://x.com/Frecs_Ross/status/1881968595632377962
  • dredmorbius 2y ago
    For those who cannot / prefer not to click through: top reply is a new "coin" launch.
• Fokamul 2y ago
  Ross deserved prison 100%, but 2x life + 40 years in American prison, which is hell on earth on purpose. That's just beyond fc** up. All these people here saying his sentence is deserved. It's just sick. How is your crime rate going? Declining...right? ....nope
  • Ylpertnodi 2y ago
    ...and the chemicals he would have supplied are being sliced and diced (padded out, to make more money), and you have to (in my country) go to some pretty dodgy areas to get what you want.
• riiii 2y ago
  [flagged]
• eddie_catflap 2y ago
  It seems like a lot of the opposition to this I’m seeing online is because Trump is the one that granted it. Ridiculous hyperbole about Ross ‘inventing the Dark Web’ or ‘Trump freed a sex trafficker’ is a great reminder that for some people, their ideological opposition can never do anything right and they’ll condemn anything they do without even a second of consideration. I’m not an avowed Trump supporter (or even American) but believe this was the right call to make. The sentence was overly harsh and he has both served his time and reformed. I’m glad he has been released.
• throwaway2037 2y ago
  This is a general question for any reader here who disagrees with the original prison sentence. (Ignore the Presidential pardon for a moment.) What is a reasonable prison sentence for his crimes? 10-20 years?
• DrNosferatu 2y ago
  Some questions, as many of us are from another continent and are only marginally aware of the matter - so, for many here at HN: 1. Ross Ulbricht the ultimate entrepreneur? 2. Ross Ulbricht was a freedom fighter?
  • Ylpertnodi 2y ago
    As a eu-er, yes and yes. (For me, and many of my friends).
  • DrNosferatu 2y ago
    Wow - really surprised. - So, what about the exploitation, violence, and devastating addiction that results from no-rules drug purveying/trafficking? (how would you compare Ross Ulbright to medical opioid purveyers/traffickers? If the same, what are they morally?) - Isn't murder for hire outright objectionable?
• 2-3-7-43-1807 2y ago
  can't wait for him to star on joe rogan podcast!
• gadders 2y ago
  Original story here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9626985 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9626985 I wish we could run some sort of sentiment analysis to see who was pro and anti the sentencing then vs now.
• peter_retief 2y ago
  I always thought the sentence was too extreme, he broke some laws he should do some time. Not life without parole.
• varispeed 2y ago
  This is amazing. Well done.
• deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
• saltserv 2y ago
  [dead]
• gigatexal 2y ago
  What’s the overall take of HN here? Was the government overstepping? Is everyone supporting this undoing of his sentence? Are we generally pro free drug trade? Or are we more anti-FBI?
  • varsketiz 2y ago
    My grasp of the sentiment in the comments - majority of folk here seem to think Ross did enough time for his crime.
    • gigatexal 2y ago
      thanks for summarizing
  • ozim 2y ago
    I don’t support the undoing. Government wasn’t overstepping, facilitating bad stuff on such scale has to be taken down with big consequences. There is no „I was just running a site and people used it for bad stuff” he had all intentions and he profited from it.
    • gigatexal 2y ago
      I agree. The lengthy sentence likely was such that it stood as a deterrence to other upstarts / would-be drug marketplace kingpins.
  • aksss 2y ago
    “We”? Examine your own principles, review the facts, come to your own conclusion.
  • dredmorbius 2y ago
    The overall take of HN is that a sober discussion of this situation isn't possible on this site.
    • Karrot_Kream 2y ago
• nsajko 2y ago
  Is Trump not supposed to be tough-on-crime? How does pardoning a drug dealer factor into that? Is Trump against the war on drugs?
• TriangleEdge 2y ago
  I'm genuinely surprised of the reactions on this thread. Trump just announced that cartels down south are terrorist organizations. This means that some of the members will likely die by the hand of the us govt. How is running an open market for drugs, weapons, etc different? Seems contradictory to me, what am I missing?
• dools 2y ago
  This pardon is corrupt. Ross' parents donated to Trump and he pardoned their son as a favour. Whether or not you think he deserved the prison time, the problem here is how utterly brazen Trump is in accepting bribes.
  • jgilias 2y ago
    Trump doesn’t care about Ross’ parents or their donations much. What he did care about were libertarian votes. There was a deal that libertarians will support Trump if he promises to free Ross. This is on record, you can find it.
    • SV_BubbleTime 2y ago
      So, I’m seeing politician followed through on promise to voters. I’m sure this can swing to some orange man bad, I’m just not seeing it.
• saltserv 2y ago
  [dead]
• rnernento 2y ago
  In 2021, Ulbricht's prosecutors and defense agreed that Ulbricht would relinquish any ownership of a newly discovered fund of 50,676 Bitcoin (worth nearly $5.35 billion in 2025) seized from a hacker in November 2021.[78] The Bitcoin had been stolen from Silk Road in 2013 and Ulbricht had been unsuccessful in getting them back. The U.S. government traced and seized the stolen Bitcoin. Ulbricht and the government agreed the fund would be used to pay off Ulbricht's $183 million debt in his criminal case, while the Department of Justice would take custody of the Bitcoin.[79][80]
  • dbspin 2y ago
    [flagged]
    • haswell 2y ago
      What are you suggesting here? That the earlier bitcoin seizure somehow led to this pardon? I’m not following.
      • dbspin 2y ago
        No you're right. I'm sure Trump released him as a deeply principled and selfless act.
        • haswell 2y ago
          I’m not suggesting that. I’m trying to understand what benefit you believe Trump received out of this whole scenario, and specifically how the handling of the bitcoin played a role.
    • jdhzzz 2y ago
      Well an upper bound anyway. Maybe, "The Art of the Deal" could have gotten it a lot closer to $1.2 B.
  • lvl155 2y ago
    Bingo. US always has been about commerce and money. It wouldn’t shock me if Ross has at least a few million hidden in some “lost wallet” printed out in a vault some where. He was smart enough to know he would get caught one day.
• chocolateteeth 2y ago
  How is the thread basically off topic?
• liendolucas 2y ago
  I think that we have to agree that anyone doing this today will definitely go to jail, and is my personal opinion that there must be a punishment. Now, the discussion could be if a life sentence is a fair sentence or not. I personally feel that a life sentence is a disproportionate punishment, moreover if the subject shows a different attitude after being in jail for more than a decade. Ten years time to medidate about what you did is plenty of time to change someone's mind, obviously if you are a person willing to do things differently.
  • aksss 2y ago
    Wasn’t it _two_ life sentences plus forty years?
• honeybadger1 2y ago
  can we all just agree that he was given a ridiculous sentence and trump did a good thing, is that so hard.
• giantg2 2y ago
  I'm curious, what are the arguments for or against him being pardoned?
• I_am_tiberius 2y ago
  I know he wasn't convicted of hiring a hitman, and I know the attempt didn't succeed, but he still tried to kill other people. Moreover, during a Bitcoin conference, he gave a live talk from prison via phone and still lied, claiming they planted the log on his laptop. A full pardon is ridiculous. It's unfair to so many people, including his partners like Variety Jones, also known as Thomas Clark. On the other hand, I'm pretty sure he won't do anything like this again.
  • HlessClaudesman 2y ago
    Actual murderers get out in the time that Ross served. The concept of justice must include an element of proportionality, I would argue that Ross's sentence, for a first time non-violent criminal, was over the top. Without proportionality justice becomes arbitrary, based more on luck and your connections to power. We punish those we can punish: the little guy. Whilst those running governments, corporations and networks that facilitate repression, hatred and genocide go scot free.
    • immibis 2y ago
      Yeah, but in that case, we should pardon all people convicted of drug possession or distribution, not specifically Ross.
      • HlessClaudesman 2y ago
        Sure, sounds good. The war on drugs was a dumb idea. Let's spend 1/4 of that all the drug enforcement money on harm reduction.
    • Algent 2y ago
      Wasn't silk road selling way more than just drugs ? Like, pornography and gun, worldwide. When you facilitate both sex trafficking, organized crime and potentially terrorism you can't exactly be surprised you get hit with everything.
      • 2y ago
• moogly 2y ago
  What's even going on? Why is everyone treating this guy as some kind of political prisoner all of a sudden? I would've expected responses like this for Aung San Suu Kyi or Dawit Isaak or someone, but _this guy_? Really? Oh, I guess he is an e n t r e p r e n e u r... I get it now.
• andyjohnson0 2y ago
  Non-USian here. I'm interested in why. Given that Trump didn't pardon Ulbricht during his first presidential term, why now? What does Trump, who is notoriously transactional, get in return for this? Alternatively, what signal is he sending and to who?
  • mardifoufs 2y ago
    To be honest if Trump would've pardoned him in his first term it would've been way too short of a sentence for what he did. Though I hate the usual libertarian defense that makes him out to be an innocent martyr, I think that 10 years is somewhat enough for what he did. It would have been a normal sentence in a lot of countries outside the US.
    • andyjohnson0 2y ago
      Thanks. I appreciate your view on the sentence, but I'm interested in why Trump would issue a pardon. I'm unconvinced that Trump in 2020 thought Ulbricht's total sentence was okay, but four years later has apparently changed his mind. So who's the client here? It doesn't seem to be Ulbricht - is it libertarians in general? Why does Trump, as a second term president, actually care?
      • mannerheim 2y ago
        There are credibility issues if you make promises you don't follow up on, especially very public promises that are completely within your power to carry out; there are no limits on the presidential pardon power, barring that it only applies to federal crimes.
• grey-area 2y ago
  For my friends, anything. For my enemies, the law.
• constantcrying 2y ago
  Here is what the discussion looked like almost a decade ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9626985 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9626985 Very striking to see how the sentiment has drastically shifted, while the facts of the case did not. There is a really cultural shift visible in how this issue is seen on here.
  • echoangle 2y ago
    Can you explain the differences you see? People found the sentence too harsh at the time, too, it looks like.
  • skylurk 2y ago
    Seems kinda the same to me?
    • aspect0545 2y ago
      Now people complain about the pardon, back then people complained about the sentence. People love to complain.
      • diggan 2y ago
        I know it seems almost impossible, but it might be that the group of people who complained about the sentence, may be a different group than the one who complain about the pardon.
      • jkestner 2y ago
        I internalized a long time ago when doing customer service that people don’t write you when they’re happy.
        • looofooo0 2y ago
          I am very happy with your informative comment. Thanks you, you can go on with your life now.
      • 2y ago
• namirez 2y ago
  I don’t get it. Was every non-violent drug offender in federal prisons pardoned or only this guy? If so, why?
• kundi 2y ago
  Is Donald also refunding everyone’s deposits on Silkroad?
• jerlygits 2y ago
  If I wanted to know this, I’d visit Reddit.
• subjectsigma 2y ago
  The amount of doublethink, false-flagging, misinformation, and “looking the other way” in this thread is just absolutely disgusting.
• m3kw9 2y ago
  More people should get these “pardons” instead of the parole process based on the similar criteria on how they are pardoned.
• ubermonkey 2y ago
  I'm just assuming any pardons issued since Monday are probably to bad people.
• sys32768 2y ago
  I wish this thread were discussing how in America you can get drunk in a bar, step into a 4,000 motorized bullet, kill someone or an entire family, and get a slap on the wrist.
• major505 2y ago
  Didnt he paid a hitman to kill a dude, and ended up being an fbi agent ?
• charlieok 2y ago
  Ross, you can set up identities on decentralized social platforms now! https://rossulbricht.medium.com/decentralize-social-media-cc47dcfd4f99 https://rossulbricht.medium.com/decentralize-social-media-cc...
• stego-tech 2y ago
  I’m not necessarily going to comment on his behaviors directly, as everyone else has already stated that in part or in whole. My grievance, my perspective, is that it’s yet another white man getting a slap on the wrist for wrongdoing while doing nothing to correct any of the underlying problems or pardon others who engaged in similar or lesser behaviors. The war on drugs has always been farcical, deliberately engineered to target minority groups who were opposing power dynamics at the time. It’s why - despite popular opinion to the contrary - cannabis remains broadly illegal at the Federal level and enforced globally through a web of treaties. It’s always been about creating the means of entrapment for those inconvenient to power. Pardoning Ross smacks of a gift to cryptobros to earn their loyalty to the current powers that be, rather than an acknowledgement of a past mistake. It is nakedly political, pardoning a white man from an otherwise good background while others languish in prison on far less serious charges or convictions. Were any of the drug dealers on his black market similarly pardoned? Were any of his consumers? Of course not, because Ross was a Capitalist making profit in an untapped market, and the others were individuals who were not. The entire thing is nauseating, and is enough to wash my hands of all involved were the need to dismantle this farce of a war not so grave.
• jashper 2y ago
  This is the best news I've heard in a while
• _yb2s 2y ago
  I feel torn about this because it seems there was good evidence for attempted murder- and I cannot understand why they never tried him for that (seemingly larger) crime. However, for the crime he was actually found guilty of, the sentence was unfair and unreasonable. It seems they unethically sentenced him for crimes he was not even ever charged with. I'd also argue he almost certainly saved a huge number of lives with Silk Road: the ability to view eBay style feedback and chemical test results makes buying illegal drugs far safer than buying them on the street. On Silk Road people could buy from a reputable seller with a long history of providing unadulterated products, and could view testimonials from other buyers who had sent the products for chemical analysis.
  • azinman2 2y ago
    Not going to comment on the murder part as that’s well discussed here. I would take issue with assuming that it was net positive with ratings. Given the anonymous nature handling bots spamming fake reviews would be even harder to catch here, and you ultimately don’t know who ended up addicted/hooked/DUI’s etc from the easy availability this provided. I’m not sure the total effects could ever be qualified, but it’s not like unadulterated drugs are automatically safe. Just look at how many lives pharma-grade opioids ruined, even though they were “safe”. That’s also not to mention guns and all kinds of other dangerous & illegal parts of it. I do not understand why he pardoned this guy when he’s supposedly anti-drug and anti-cartel.
    • mtoner23 2y ago
      i think this points to a bunch of weird crypto people are actually in charge of a lot of this administration
      • etc-hosts 2y ago
        Marc Andreessen and Ben Horowitz have significant influence on staffing. Vivek Ramaswamy is a partner at a16z
    • grayhatter 2y ago
• josefritzishere 2y ago
  I know values and priorities change over time. that gets reflected in the party platforms. But ee are in a weird place politically... where Republicans are now soft on crime? It's weird.
• subpixel 2y ago
  I will take this opportunity to reflect on the fact that I spent some time considering a purchase of certain controlled substances on Silk Road, but failed to recognize that my own purchasing impulse was a pretty good indicator that the currency involved might be worth a casual investment.
• impalallama 2y ago
  This is the same president that wants to give the death penalty to Drug Dealers but I guess that's fine so long as you use crypto.
• deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
• deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
• entropyneur 2y ago
  I don't think he should have done any time for the drug-related charges. And 10 years is more than enough for a murder-for-hire in which nobody got hurt. So this seems... just.
  • knodi 2y ago
    Curious what your thinking behind "he should have done any time for the drug-related charges"?
    • entropyneur 2y ago
      I believe the responsibility for the harm caused by addictive drugs lies on the user to such great extent, that whatever remains for the people who facilitate the sale is not enough for it to be a criminal offence. It's still immoral the same way it's immoral to operate a gambling shop. But in Ulbricht's case I'd say even this part is mitigated by the fact that facilitating the trade of dangerous drugs was a side effect of running a useful service for responsible drug users.
      • someothherguyy 2y ago
        > It's still immoral the same way it's immoral to operate a gambling shop. What if they sell things that aren't what they say they are and the user dies or is hurt?
        • entropyneur 2y ago
          That's totally the responsibility of the seller, not the platform. Especially so, if the platform takes steps to prevent such incidents.
          • someothherguyy 2y ago
            Is it though? You might want to debate a moral philosopher over me, but I don't think you should make broad statements like that as if it was established truth.
• anonu 2y ago
  So is SBF next? FTX customers were made whole and he didn't try to kill anyone or facilitate the narcotics trade.
• cleandreams 2y ago
  I think this pardon just reflects Trump's transactional politics. Ulbricht has sympathizers in high places now because crypto is all over this administration. In the long run letting political influence trump (no pun intended) the criminal justice system is a very bad thing. By world standards our criminal justice system is a strength of the country. A pity if we lose that.
  • CuteMemeCoin 2y ago
    Ulbricht was unfairly sentenced. All of the death threat allegations were never proven. He did not deserve to rot in prison for life for creating a website.
  • Gothmog69 2y ago
    And yet the Ross Ulbricht case was a huge injustice. Biden should have done it.
• deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
• idunnoman1222 2y ago
  Hacker news absolutely loved this 1700 comments which makes me want to list all hacker news threads ordered by most comments because these are usually the best ones
• AcerbicZero 2y ago
  Based.
• lulznews 2y ago
  Trump haters in absolute shambles here.
• snakeyjake 2y ago
  Libertarians are the cheapest fucking buys of all time. They will sell their souls to a man who would grind them into a paste and sell that paste as a protein snack to his cultists-- in exchange for a hollow, symbolic win that either impacts them in no way whatsoever or maliciously hurts people they don't like. At least with other political groups you have to, you know, BRIBE them. Libertarians are so used to receiving absolutely nothing that they will mistake the scent of a steak for a full meal.
  • mannerheim 2y ago
    That hollow, symbolic win could have been given to them by anyone other than Trump. If nobody else thinks a group's interests are worth listening to, don't be surprised when they start chasing after the tiniest morsels.
• jjallen 2y ago
  So if you start a website and facilitate thousands of drug deals and get lots of people to ask the president to pardon you, and you’re white, you can get a pardon. But for everyone else you can’t. Even if you’re in prison for possession of drugs for more than ten years. Also if you try to overthrow the government you get pardoned which I would have guessed approaches treason. These are pardonable offenses and conditions.
  • aerostable_slug 2y ago
    There's no reason to bring race into this. Trump has pardoned PoC convicted of drug offenses, e.g. Weldon Angelos. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weldon_Angelos_case https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weldon_Angelos_case
    • jjallen 2y ago
      He’s white and that can’t be left out of it. Let’s not pretend race doesn’t matter in any of these things. It is a fact that he’s white and I’m guessing ALL of the Jan 6th people are too.
      • aerostable_slug 2y ago
        When Trump pardoned Christopher 2X, was he simply confused about his race? There are plenty of people Trump pardoned that weren't white: https://www.justice.gov/pardon/pardons-granted-president-donald-j-trump-2017-2021 https://www.justice.gov/pardon/pardons-granted-president-don... This kind of divisive nonsense is purposeless and doesn't productively add to the conversation.
  • bmelton 2y ago
    I felt the same when Biden pardoned the judge who put kids in jail for pay, or the nursing home CEO who took money away from the elderly to buy yachts, but I'd decided that pardons were effectively for sale (tho likely by barter) -- seeing Biden close out his term and Trump open his term with pardons has been kind to those who'd like to compare and contrast, but they both mostly just appear to be paying down debts.
• bastardoperator 2y ago
  We're just letting sex traffickers of children off the hook now? Gross. Putting my head in the sand for the next 3 years and 11 months.
• throwaway314155 2y ago
  ...her?
• 0xbadcafebee 2y ago
  Gentle reminder that we have 1,459 more days of this shit. We really don't have to upvote every crazy fucking thing this guy does, or HN will be nothing but that for the next four years.
• WesternWind 2y ago
  A full pardon should mean that he can get all his bitcoin back, as I understand it.
• RobinHirst11 2y ago
  deserved the pardon. privacy should be for all, not just the billionaires.
• TrapLord_Rhodo 2y ago
  i wonder if he'll pardon snowden.