https://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2025/01/22/Trump-pardons-Ross-Ulbricht/5181737526042/
President Trump has issued a full and unconditional pardon to Ross Ulbricht, the founder of the dark web Silk Road marketplace of illicit drugs, murders, and other illegal activities. Ulbricht was sentenced to life in prison in May 2015 for his operation of Silk Road, which was active between January 2011 and October 2013. "I just called the mother of Ross William Ulbright [sic] 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," Trump said in a statement published on his Truth Social social media platform.
This discussion was created by hubie (1068) for logged-in users only, but now has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Trump Pardons Dark Web Silk Road Marketplace Founder Ross Ulbricht
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 27 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
(1)
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Ingar on Saturday January 25, @11:08AM (23 children)
I admit, I have some mixed feelings about this one. Running a marketplace for illegal goods and services like Silk Road is obviously something any sane jurisdiction doesn't allow,
but on the other hand, this guy was sentenced to double life in prison plus 40 years. That does seem a bit excessive.
Understanding is a three-edged sword: your side, their side, and the truth.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by krishnoid on Saturday January 25, @11:49AM (6 children)
Next up on hand-wringing feelings: Sam Bankman-Fried [justice.gov] uh rice [businessinsider.com].
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 25, @12:45PM (1 child)
> ... uh rice
Would that be white rice or brown?
(Score: 2) by hendrikboom on Saturday January 25, @03:39PM
I don't know about that rice, but I am occasionally offered saffron rice, which is yellow.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by JoeMerchant on Saturday January 25, @03:49PM (2 children)
He said "he did not do anything wrong."
If you exploit a legal loophole to steal someones home, auction it and pocket the proceeds, is that wrong? It was legal, after all. How about if you manage to do that thousands of times, is it still o.k. because lawyers say it is legal? How about when only 3/4 lawyers say it is legal? 51%? 49%? Just a few lawyers, but they win in court?
Instead of stealing homes, how about scamming thousands or millions of people for an average of a few hundred bucks? Is it o.k. on that scale?
I think not, which is why I never "got into" Bitcoin, meme coins, ETH or the rest.
🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Monday January 27, @03:25PM (1 child)
Yet, Sam Bankman-Fried didn't go to jail for those things. He went to jail for actual fraud. He was also tossed under the boss by an ex-girlfriend turned informant, for what I understand to be very little gain for herself. Though, perhaps I'm a bit off on exactly how things went down. Sure, until everything came out, I thought maybe he was just incompetent. Afterwards, it was hard to argue that he wasn't knowingly doing shady things.
Looking at the Ross Ulbricht case again, 2 life time sentences plus 40 years is a gross miscarriage of justice. While he may have tried to get someone killed, no one was killed by him or by anyone he paid. 10 to 11 years in jail for what he did, may have been a reasonable sentence. I really don't know. It certainly sounds like he should have been in jail for the crimes he committed though. However, people have been sentenced for less time for actually killing other people.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday January 27, @05:05PM
> maybe he was just incompetent.
Anybody out there "running a new thriving business" living a lifestyle of the 0.1% or higher who is thinking about claiming an incompetence defense, may well be incompetent but the defense isn't likely to hold up.
> people have been sentenced for less time for actually killing other people.
The justice system is anything but fair or even handed - I don't know that the term "just" even enters into a rational comparison. Where you are tried, when, who's fighting on both sides has enormously more effect on the outcome than whatever crime was committed or even the circumstances of that commission. This unevenness of outcomes is by design, pumping up the value of legal representation. Of the great many things in government that need reforms, the courts are the long slow burn that need the most transparency and examination if we are going to make them serve society more fairly and even handedly. I think they're also last on most people's priority lists, and the courts themselves endeavor to stay out of the limelight, they like their power. If they were truly fair and even handed, they could be replaced with an algorithm.
🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 25, @11:21PM
When US banks launder money it's AOK:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/apr/03/us-bank-mexico-drug-gangs [theguardian.com]
When non-US banks launder money they get a wrist slap:
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/outrageous-hsbc-settlement-proves-the-drug-war-is-a-joke-230696/ [rollingstone.com]
But when some guy makes secret compartments for cars:
https://web.archive.org/web/20150214090515/http://www.wired.com/2013/03/alfred-anaya/all [archive.org]
(Score: 0, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 25, @01:25PM
With regards to the sentence, there's a (Danish, I think) saying: You can beat a guy senseless, but don't take his wallet.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Deep Blue on Saturday January 25, @02:29PM (5 children)
Let's see if his next venture causes damage to you or someone you know and we'll see if keeping him locked up was excessive in your opinion.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by khallow on Sunday January 26, @04:48PM (4 children)
Even if he turned around and immediately created Silk Road 2.0, it'd be more likely to cause benefit than harm. That's with the murder market and money laundering tossed in. The problem is that you're arguing from harm for victimless crimes like drug use or prostitution which is most of what Silk Road was. There's much more harm from enforcing victimless crime laws than there is from the crime. Even ignoring the harm from jailing people who shouldn't be, there's the dysfunction from making these things illegal: human trafficking, recreational drug adulteration, abusive pimp relationships, etc.
Also Ulbright was jailed for 11 years. He did his time.
(Score: 2) by Deep Blue on Sunday January 26, @05:03PM (3 children)
Holly shit you are bat shit crazy.
What benefit would there be from a criminal enterprise? You think they keep their game to the likes of them?
Drug use is never victimless crime, you basically lose a person from the society and do you not understand the pain and suffering it causes to not only the users, but everyone around them? Not to mention the crimes they commit against people completely outside of shit like that. Are you really that much of a sociopath?
Human trafficking just not that serious? It's A-ok to ruin someone's life, but not the criminal's life? What the fuck is your major malfunction?
If someone has to suffer from these sort of crimes, let it be you next time.
(Score: 0, Flamebait) by khallow on Sunday January 26, @07:11PM (2 children)
Here's a historical example: the Underground Railroad [wikipedia.org] was a human smuggling network operating in the US that freed around 100k slaves by smuggling them out of the US South and placing them in regions that outlawed slavery (Canada being a common destination). I'm not saying here that Silk Road or any replacements are this obvious a net benefit for society, or that there aren't examples of criminal enterprises that are an obvious net harm to society and people. At this point, I'm just pointing out the falseness of this absolute claim you made.
Sorry, don't buy it. Alcohol, nicotine, and caffeine are all similar drugs and for the most part aren't used in ways that "lose a person from the society". And legalization actually eliminates the problems you talk about here like "lose a person" and crime. Legalization means easier to afford - so no reason to turn to crime, and more exposure to cultures that would encourage responsible use.
Keep in mind that is just a derogatory label with no serious meaning. Yes, human trafficking is not even remotely serious [soylentnews.org]. From that link, I pointed out the folly of labeled as "sex trafficker" a former politician who paid a 17 year old to travel with him and have sex.
The Underground Railroad was human trafficking too. If slavery were still legal today, you can bet good money that prosecutors of anyone caught participating in the Railroad would apply charges of human trafficking, RICO, wire fraud, etc.
I find it telling you can't even say what the alleged problems are supposed to be with human trafficking. Enslaving people? Sure that's a problem. Simply moving them from point A to point B? Even if for "immoral purposes", it has no victims and thus, shouldn't be a crime.
Won't happen if we make them not crimes! Legalization gets rid of your problems.
(Score: 2) by Deep Blue on Sunday January 26, @10:21PM (1 child)
I'm not talking about some slave release ring, i was talking about this case and your insane claims of it not mattering. You taking some random 0.001% thing as an example against me is just you tyring to manipulate this conversation. I am not going to be talking about those 0,001% things because they are rare enough, that i am not going to waste my time writing every one of them for you to not intentionally misunderstanding me.
I don't know about some politician and that single case of perhaps wrong conviction does not make human trafficking a not crime in any sense.
I have to explain that to you? I find it quite telling that you claim to need an explanation for that. There's a tons of problems with it.
Human trafficking is when you basically imprison a person and make them do stuff without their consent. And it's not sunshine and rainbows that people are made to do under those conditions. And no, putting people in prison for things they've done that cause other poeple harm is not human trafficking. And what ever bullshit thing you come up because i can't explain every single different case here is still bullshit.
And no, moving people from A to B without their consent is not a victimless crime. What the actual hell is going through your mind?
Legalizing won't stop someone from murdering or enslaving you, it just prevents the criminal from being punished. Suffering has nothing to do with law, what the hell?
Seriously, get help. You really need it.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday January 26, @10:43PM
Sorry, I'm not buying that. That random "0.001%" happens a lot more often than that.
No, human trafficking is a broad negative label for a lot of stuff, most which shouldn't be illegal. This is a typical propaganda trick, fallacy of composition, grouping innocuous stuff in with heinous stuff. Bigots do it all the time when they characterize an entire group (ethnic, gender, etc) by the misbehavior of a few. Here, most human trafficking isn't involuntary imprisonment or slavery. It's merely moving people around without official permission (such as the illegal/undocumented immigrants thing in the US).
And what's going through my mind is that you need to learn something about this. Ross Ulbricht didn't imprison or enslave people. Nor did Silk Road. He enabled a market for a lot of things people want, but for various stupid reasons are illegal: recreational drugs and prostitution in particular. Trying to conflate that with "murdering or enslaving you" is nonsense. I get that there was a harmful component - the alleged hit man market or whatever. But he did his time for that.
Much of the dysfunction around recreational drugs and prostitution is precisely because it has been made illegal. That why I advocate making it legal. Make it legal then they are just normal goods and services regulated like every other legal good and service that we have.
(Score: 3, Touché) by pTamok on Saturday January 25, @04:03PM
Many people not resident in the USA regards the (jail) sentences as excessively harsh for many criminal acts.
It costs a huge amount to keep people incarcerated. Purly on economic grounds, it would make sense to try rehabilitation and release.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by VLM on Saturday January 25, @04:26PM (3 children)
I'll toss out a different 50/50 analogy, on one hand the guy is super shady and probably did enough bad things to get a worse sentence but this is what they busted him for, kind of the "Al Capone Tax Evasion" situation a century a later.
On the other hand, it's kind of like sending the CEO of AT&T to jail because someone called in a threat over a telephone and as CEO he's responsible for his company; overall kind of ridiculous.
(Score: 2) by Deep Blue on Saturday January 25, @10:32PM
No it is not. That analogy does not fly.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by bussdriver on Sunday January 26, @12:30AM (1 child)
He intentionally wanted to shave money off the top of ALL ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES to facilitate the black market economy! NO MISTAKEN INTENTION!
He tried to hire assassins to kill people who might expose him. The two federal agents charged with crimes on his service may have been connected to him as well; we don't know of any bribery and blackmail he may have done as well. It's not like he confessed to everything when they caught him. He's been appealing the whole time and probably using connections and hidden money to facilitate all of that, including possibly this. I wouldn't be surprised if he got rich buying a bunch of $TRUMP coins; and during the early non-public phase too.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by khallow on Sunday January 26, @04:52PM
The only thing on your list that is backed by evidence and which I would consider a crime. 11 years in jail sounds reasonable for conspiracy to commit murder.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Beryllium Sphere (r) on Saturday January 25, @07:58PM
Granted, he was getting scammed, but he tried to hire hitmen and gave one a gun. https://www.wired.com/2015/02/read-transcript-silk-roads-boss-ordering-5-assassinations/ [wired.com]
Next time he may find real ones.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by bussdriver on Sunday January 26, @12:25AM (1 child)
Purposely creating a haven for the black market under the guise of "the free market" religion deserves a huge punishment; furthermore, the lack of moral judgement needs to prohibit such a person from any decision making role; for life. Unconditional pardon is unthinkable to... a person with a brain. It's not about punishment it's about protecting society from dangerously anti-social people... that is the functional purpose for locking them away; or killing or even deporting them (shoving them onto others being bigoted against recipients.)
Wasn't this guy also trying to hire killers to murder people to prevent his discovery? trying to be an e-Mobster?
The broken USA's legal system always made unusual punishments the norm for NEW offenses simply because you can't say "unusual" about the 1st one but really it's a chance to "send a message" which doesn't work but that myth continues despite the rights being trampled upon. We also allow people with $$$$ to appeal forever and lower their sentences down for "good behavior" (also good bribery and good connections.) So double life is realistic when you can knock that down by some equation; in the end, many serve less than their sentence.
This should be investigated for payoffs it's too easy to rule out Trump ignorance all the time. One of this guys allies with many millions could have bought this from Trump. Peter Theil is big on this shit and would do it just for his religious beliefs (libertarian-ism is a religion, it professes unfounded beliefs like the others.)
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by khallow on Sunday January 26, @04:59PM
I disagree. Most of that black market activity should have been perfectly legal. And yes, I believe strongly in a real free market.
What would be the reasonable suspicion for initiating such an investigation? Feelz on the internet?
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Monday January 27, @05:08PM
If a court imposes such a sentence, I would be more comfortable with it if the court would also pronounce some equally absurd parole eligibility. Such as: eligible for parole after 1.2 life terms plus ten years.
At least that highlights the absurdity.
Stop asking "How stupid can you be?" Some people apparently take it as a challenge.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 25, @04:26PM
Oompa Loompa found his soulmates
(Score: 2) by Frosty Piss on Saturday January 25, @06:29PM (1 child)
Is it "OK" to knowingly facilitate murder for hire?
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Monday January 27, @03:27PM
No, but he served 10 or 11 years in jail. 2 life sentences + 40 years for wanting to have someone killed is a bit much. Especially when no killings ever took place. Perhaps through sheer incompetence, but the sentence was entirely unjustified.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"