Topic: Craig Steven Wright is a liar and a fraud - Tulip Trust addresses signed message - page 6. (Read 9817 times)

Juan cries that franky1 goes into truce status way too easily.  You are such a good and compliant bud.  


Franky1?  You happen to be an understanding kind of a plural?  omg...  


You could not make it more clear that you would like to repeat nonsense until everyone throws up.




It's very weird how much gobbledy gook gibberish you can come up with.


 Do I appear afraid?


 Thanks for allowing me a break.  You are so kind.


Hey, if I were to get a 4 hour break, that would be amazing, especially with your kind of a truce maintenance.  

We understand your stance.  What we don't understand is how you have a crystal ball or time machine so that you know beyond all doubt that you are correct when you are clearly prognosticating.  Your arrogance is what's baffling. While it's possible you are right, you don't seem capable of accepting you might not be right.

If it turns out you're wrong and Ira and Faketoshi aren't colluding, you'll just go quiet until the next subject you jump to a foregone conclusion on, that we're supposedly all "too stupid to understand" because we aren't convinced by your "evidence". 

Rinse, repeat.  That's franky1 shitposting 101.

juan cries that i have not explained what CSW game is
juan cries that it doesnt fit his opinion
juan cries that i the repeat the CSW game
juan cries that he just aint understanding it

ok juan we get it you cry and dont understand.
i could not make it more clearer what ira's game is. than his actual words in the screen shot+links of the documents on record that show exactly what he is requesting

even a child could understand that ira's request sounds exactly like the things that CSW would like too
..
its very weird that you just want to repeat insults, cries, trolling attempts of how/why you dont understand.
its very weird how even after a truce you go back to insulting and then trying to spin it into speculating the future if's maybe's and could be's again

but fear not. i can clearly understand your opinions flaws and its misunderstandings. so you dont have to repeat your speculations further. so you can take a break

if you still dont understand my stance on the case. dont read my stance. JUST READ IRA'S REQUEST
which i have asked you to do many times. although you pretend whats wrote in a case is irrelevant to the case(facepalm). just read whats in the case to know what the case is about. its that simple

enjoy a 4 month break

edit to answer the two clowns below.
doomad: IRA's request is no crystal ball its in the record document. CSE game(patent troll strategy) is 4 years old story
juan: your now jsut being a nazi grammar troll. seems you have scratched the bottom of the rebuttal barrel because you cant rebut the actual iras requests because they are clearly recorded

I believe in franky1's mind, he's  telling you that it would only take a mere four months to let all the information he has fed you simmer in your head before you are gaslighted.

franky1, I'm technically confused, and I need your "from the other side" perspective, https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/bitcoin-network-knowledge-poll-5249795

Your representations of the truce are quite weird, franky1.  

Furthermore, I suggested that our truce is likely to be merely that we have been in a kind of static position in which we largely just repeat ideas rather than discussing anything new, perhaps until something else happens related to the case or maybe either of us might gain another perspective over one or more of the potentially relevant material issues related to the case.  

I doubt that we have to wait four months for new matters to come out of this subject - because in part, your boys CSW, Calvin et al are all about playing these matters in the public sphere, and if they could perhaps get any kind of pumpenings possibilities out of any of the developments, they would likely do it.   Accordingly, I doubt that they would even find it in their interest to go into total radio silence for 4 months, unless they are planning some kind of exit scam or something like that...

In other words, I doubt that we need to repeat ourselves, at this point, but maybe I might come back and attempt to figure out what the fuck you were talking about in your post, to the extent any of it might happen to mean something beyond already responded to gobbledy gook, so in that regard, you don't really seem to be saying anything substantially new in your attempt at a rendition of my position because my posts speak for themselves, rather than your spins of them.

i agree you thought ira's real requests(recorded). caused your 'its about coins' (speculative) loop
i agree that you finally hint to realise your stuck in your infinity loop of 'its about coins"
i agree trying to inform you of errors causing your loop. is then itself causing another loop
i agree that you need to read the documents and not trolling someone because they live outside your loop

so yes a truce.
seeing as this case is going to be in october now.
.. lets see if in october you can have a fresh mind thats escaped the 'its about coins' loop
and finally recognise the request for bitcoin creation IP desire/claim/tactic thats completely obvious.
4 months should be long enough to fix your own loop error
one last hint(though said many times)
stick to the requests iras team actually made and dont call their actual words irrelevant. just to then go back to your speculative loop

have a good 4 months rest

3 merits just cause you didn’t expect it, and enter the dragon.  Oy...

Master Yoda says: "Handsome fellow, Satoshi is" ...

*Satire*
Bruce Lee. Mirrors. Destroy the Image and you will break the enemy. HD *NSFW*  *18+*
- https://youtu.be/WoMVfvS8rSo

 

Hahaha. 4d chess. That would be the best-ultimate-kung-fu-master-troll move Satoshi would be able to do. He already master-trolled everyone once with the Bitcoin.

So, in essence, franky, the wanky, we are agreeing that our discussion is becoming repetitive.  We have both exhausted our various talking points, and stated our case several times and in several ways.... correct? 

Can we rest assured and let our already discussed information pieces stand until there might be new developments in the case?

What do you think, franky?  Do we have a current truce-point in our discussion    (until you say a new dumb and seemingly implausible thing, which probably will not keep us in silence for very long)?       

all that juan wants to keep circling back to is:
"settlement" "coins" "payout"
seems he is stuck in that mindset again.
oh well.

IRA and CSW are both saying the partnership is real
but .. heres the thing, they want THE JUDGE to say he agree's that its real
then they can patent troll

i know juan wants to imagine some 410k coin demand thing happening.
but this whole game is about getting THE JUDGE to agree that the partnership is real under only the voice of ira and CSW both saying its real. without any further/actual proof.
ira has directly asked the judge for this.

but i see from now till october+ juan will just want to talk about coins coins coins
so ill leave him in that ignorant 'its about coin' bubble.
where there is no documents that suggest that its only about the coins

You lost me.  I think that I already said what I think, so your describing what I think is probably NOT very helpful.



I doubt that my opinion has been changing in regards to the various points that I have been making, but whatever, you can believe whatever you like.  I think that my posts speak for themselves, rather than you assessing what they might mean... which seems ridiculous on its face.   



I doubt there is any value in reminding me about anything related to various CSW long cons.



Again, I doubt that any of my thinking has been changing regarding these various matters.



I don't see any reason to imagine anything.


Huh?  Dave is dead.  There is a claim that CSW took his coins, and CSW largely admits it, so you seem to be getting into irrelevant areas, again.  Should be no surprise, there.



You seem to be off topic, again, and I think that I already addressed this matter ,which is that Craig pretty much said that he has control over all of the coins that he and Dave mined together.



I am not proclaiming to know how it ends; however, you seem to be proclaiming that you know how it ends.  I am willing to wait and see how it ends, before I proclaim to know the ending.


Hm?  We will see what the judgement says after the trial, and if there is no trial, then maybe we will find out what the terms of the settlement are?  Unless they do a private settlement, then we might not find out, right? omg  omg.... 



I don't recall hoping for anything, so probably you are projecting your hopes on me, or maybe you are projecting the opposite of your hopes on me, and in that way you will have an argument that you can beat.  That is called, creating a strawman, and then showing how your side of the argument is the WINNER.  Great!!!!  Franky1 wins!!!!!!!    Yay, franky1!!!!!!!!! franky1 wins because created his own facts and his own logic and franky1 showed that he was right about everything related to everything and that everyone else was wrong because franky1 created their arguments, too.  Yay, franky1!!!!!!!!!


O.k.  sounds like you are making a prediction, and sure maybe you could be correct about this, perhaps?


Speculation on your part, no?  You are saying that they are not going to be part of the case, but you are speculating that they might benefit or not from a judgement or a settlement to the extent that they are real... and not a total straw entity fabrication that CSW and Calvin have created.


I did not know that.  I thought that it was about Ira wanting to get paid for the coins that CSW admits to taking.


You are repeating yourself.  the partnership does not seem to be contested.


I don't proclaim to be any kind of expert in what motions have been filed and what motions have not been filed in the case.


Ok. So, you, franky1, are a ATO tax expert?  Great.  I could tell that you knew a lot of things, and gosh you even know more than I previously believed.


You mean the baloney floating around in your head?  No I don't get it.  Maybe you should 'splain to me, Eli5?  [No don't do it, franky1. Please, please, please. I am just kidding.]


Another prediction by franky1.  We will see, won't we.


I don't think that they are asking.  I believe that CSW is proclaiming the existence of the partnership, so there seems to be no issue regarding whether there was a partnership. CSW admits it.  The court need not "solidify" that particular issue....


Sure.  Maybe they will make a settlement, based on their private discussions.  That could happen.  Sure.

even your buddy group doomad showed how the judge is not interest in where/who has the coins.
he isnt even judging on how much % CSW should pay out.
its not even about working out who orwhen or how one should buy out the other.
THATS YOUR SPECUALTION THAT THINKS ITS ABOUT THE COINS AND PAYOUTS


now your slowly grasping the real point of the court drama. its about both sides not opposing. but both trying to get a judge to document there is actually a partnership by both sides saying there was
.. its about getting the judge to document that he finds into fact that there was a partnership

need you be reminded of CSW long con since 2016 trying to get legal proof there was a partnership.. this is it this is his method to get legal documented 'proof'

and now your back to thinking that its about coins again(facepalm)
imagine other cases of other REAL companies.
they can go to court to just be judged of how much share a co-founder has. it does not auto-result in liquidation of the company.
it just creates rights and abilities where the parties have to share the company and run it together
.. if you think that all co-founder disputes result in instant liquidation of a company. the dang... Facebook should be dead by now.. oh wait. its still operating

i think. and take this as some positive criticism to help guide you out of the circle you are in. maybe you are stuck with the belief that the only ending is a payout/liquidation ordered by the court.
your stuck thinking about money...

however. this case has not asked for a liquidation. nor payout. just a legal judgement of partnership to be honoured. and that all bitcoin IP is included in that partnership

your rhetoric of the hopes that a beg for coins will then come.. the hope it CSW trips up and falls in a coffin and gets nailed inside. but that is just hopes. and not what this case is about nor been documented as.
you hope IRA demands CSW buys ira out. but thats not been asked. no buy out has been discussed

they are not liable to the 'partnership' these guys came after and are funding CSW lifestyle and schemes. they wont be dragged into the case of the 'partnership' as its not about that.

im just saying these 'money guys got conned by CSW to pay his bills and he promises them future riches via his 'story' exclusives and Slapp earnings. they are wiling to pay if they get a judgemetn that the partnership is real as it helps them then SLAPP random people. which CSW has been threatening to do for years


the whole game is to get a judge to say that no one is denying the partnership
then its.. win CSW and his patent troll games and hugs from his 'moneyguys'

this case is about geting a judge to agree that the partnership is full and not in disagreement thus making it legally an entity that has existed from the times the party have said.
thus winning CSW his long con

finally welcome to reality!!!
well done.
with all YOUR if's and buts and maybes and could be's you actually have said that ira has not even motioned for it

ok quick update on the other layers of CSW scummery:
at this present moment, from ATO point of view
CSW was just been handed a bill after they done an audit.
that is all..
(he then legged it out of australia)
now with the 'ownership' of the partnership in debate. the ATO still civilly have to work out who the bill payer actually is. which is civil. which is limited to a statue of limitations period

yes we outside of courtrooms/tax offices. know its all a scam. but legally its just an unpaid bill. with a yet to begin civil case to determine fraud. and then a criminal case to punish fraud.

its the whole tax avoidance/tax evasion difference, where avoidance is legally allowed and civil. and evasion is criminal
ATO has to first determine avoidance vs evasion.
so again. once passed a certain date the ATO cant then go after him civilly to then try him criminally.
and thats wht this ira drama is playing out.. the deadline for civil. to avoid paying bill.
and then have the partnership ratified to avoid criminal. by then saying yea we got a bill and the company is solid. but you took too long to demand payment so we dont have to pay now.

hopefully your getting the many layers of CSW games now
and i hope this time you realise that this case will not end in a 'liquidation' order. because judges dont ask for that by default/automatic practice.
otherwise thousands of businesses would get shutdown and employees lose jobs. just over co-founder disputes.

this case. by actual words from ira's team is requesting that dave be included in a partnership. solidifying the partnership into a legal entity by doing so.

all the money talk is outside the courtroom. and not going to be CSW coffin nail

Fuck that bullshit, franky1.  None of us are presuming that CSW has any assets or that he mined any bitcoin or that he is anything but a fraud, but he is still stuck with his decision NOT to dispute the claims that he is making in the court.  So if he says that he mined bitcoin, and that he is satoshi and that he is rich as fuck with bitcoin like Scrooge McDuck, then he is going to have to pay, even though we all know that he is full of shit.. the court knows too, but they are still going to make him pay (or rule that he has to pay).



I don't know exactly what you are talking about franky1.  Seems that you are just repeating unimportant nonsense.

Ira has no reason to contest what CSW is saying because so long as CSW says that he is rich as fuck, then Ira is going to get a cut, even if all of that is a fraud, lie scam.  Ira gives no fucks about that because, he just wants CSW, CA et al to pay the value, even if they have to get the money from some other location, which may well be what the court tells them that they have to do.


They don't need to ratify.  CSW admits it (so it is a non-issue, even if its a lie)


That is correct.  They don't need to argue, because if CSW is claiming that there is a partnership, then Ira is going to get half.  Who cares about the other details?


They don't need to validate it.  CSW is claiming it.  Therefore, a non-issue that is not being contested.


none of us seem to be playing what ifs, except to the extent that we don't know if CSW and those diptwats might change some of their positions before trial, as they seem inclined to do.  So, none of us can know about how the court is going to rule on what issues, especially if we don't know if CSW and those fucktwats might try to change the issues along the way, but that is how litigation goes.  Sometimes there are changes in issues and positions and surprises, so in that regard, we cannot always know how the litigation is going to play out before it actually plays out, even if we might have pretty decent projections regarding how it seems to be playing out.. based on current facts and current posturings of the parties.



Huh?  Haven't you learned shit yet, franky1?  you still have not figured out the purpose of depositions and discovery, even though the process has been explained to you numerous times?

Let me 'splain one more time just because I like you so much.  Depositions/discovery are used to prepare for trial and to figure out what kind of testimony might come out of various witnesses and what kinds of documents are available to attempt to establish or corroborate testimony and positions and even might result in the production of stipulations regarding evidence, legal issues or even settlement of the whole fucking case... or maybe the changing of some of the issues based on what evidence is produced during that process.  So, even while they are preparing for trial, issues can end up changing because they may decide to either narrow or broaden the case based upon such discoveries and even some of the pleadings/motions that might happen along the way, too.

Sometimes the court might not allow them to either change their pleadings or to change the issues, but even one of the courts recent rulings that rejected Ira's motion for default sanctions demonstrated that sometimes issues might end up being added based upon such motions, and in this situation, all of a sudden, one of the issues seems to be that CSW, CA, et al are proclaiming that CSW suffers from a genius kind of autism, which causes more facts and issues to be potentially presented during trial as compared to what would have happened if either the court ruled against such CSW claims or if they had decided to grant the motion for Ira to receive some of those default sanctions on some of the issues and in regards to Ira's attempt to limit evidence that could be presented (and that motion to limit some of the evidence/issues in that direction failed.. at least, so far.).




You and I already discussed this, and of course, we disagree.  It seems that most everyone else posting here disagrees with you on this point too, but I am not going to speak for others, even though I cannot recall anyone really agreeing with you on any kind of substantive and/or material way in regards to this point that seems to suggest that there is not really any adversarial position between the parties.


I agree that it could take a bit of time to figure out what assets that CSW has and is able to liquidate or the extent to which the purported companies that he created or even Calvin might be liable for the anticipated judgement against CSW.



Who fucking cares what you deem, franky1?


Well, of course there seem to be various attempts to create companies and to confuse who is responsible for what in order to attempt to limit liability.  I surely have very little clue regarding how all of those smoke and mirror bullshit entities are going to end up affecting liability or whether they also will end up getting drug into litigation at some point.



You are getting ahead of yourself.  One case at a time, unless those bullshit entities get drug into this litigation, too.



No assumptions are being made here.  I believe that CSW has proclaimed that he is rich as fuck, and Ira is not contesting that claim, even though it is not likely to be true, as you mentioned a half a million times, franky1.



Yeah.  You are smarter than everyone else.  I already understand that to be your perspective.    

Pretty funny when you think about it.  



O.k. fair enough.  Everyone seems to recognize this, more or less.


Speak for yourself, in regards to what "we wish"


Again.  Speak for yourself in regards to what you are wishing for.



We already went over this many times. In other words, you are making no sense, franky1.

In regards to the case, nobody gives any shits about whether CSW is the creator or not.  For all intents and purposes in regards to the case, CSW is claiming to be the creator, and so therefore it is a non-issue.  Does not need to be resolved in the case.



You seem to hardly get shit, franky1.



It seems that CSW is going to get punished, whether we want it or not, but we still need to see how all of this plays out.  CSW seems to be in a bit of a pickle, so it seems difficult to envision ways in which he does not get punished.  Of course, he could attempt to disappear or employ some other kind of exit scam, so that might be one of the cards that CSW might be planning to play if it appears that his corpus might be in jeopardy of getting locked up (which he likely would not want.. but who knows, he might be willing to play the "get locked up card" and the subsequent "see if he can get out card")




Sure.  That's possible that CSW will not get punished.  Seems unlikely, but sure, it is possible.  Within reason, almost anything is possible.



The prison motion might come later, or maybe there could be a subsequent proceeding or maybe the court could raise contempt sua sponte.  I don't think that we have enough information to know how likely it could be that CSW gets locked up at all or that Ira motions for it.



Where did the judge say that?  I can imagine that if CSW is saying that he has the coins, then no one is contesting that he has the coins, so we do not want to get into that issue, if that issue is settled because CSW is admitting it.



Fair enough.  Seems to be an issue that is not contested.


I don't see how it is about that either, even if you, franky1, want it to be about that.



Sure, courts tend to be pretty receptive to the parties settling the matter outside of the court, especially in civil cases, which this still seems to only be a civil case, as far as I have heard about it, so far.


You do?


O.k.  Maybe you are starting to get it?  But I have my doubts.



Hm?  Does not seem that they need to resolve all of those above issues in this case.  You seem to be convoluting matters again, franky1.  Right when I started to consider that you might be getting things, you ramble out a bunch of nonsense.  


I doubt that ATO is going to let him "out of paying" taxes in Australia, especially since he has been engaging in fraud and concealment and tax authorities are not so easy to just let those kinds of things go based on some kind of supposed technicality.  In other words, you are getting ahead of ur lil selfie, again, franky1.  



I doubt that the Australian Tax Office is going to consider itself as limited in its powers or jurisdiction as you seem to establish, franky1.


Seems a bit speculative, but hey, we are allowed to speculate here, I suppose.  And you are part of the "speculative we," franky1.  Congrats.  

... and then the 'real' Nakamoto turns up, proves that they all had absolutely nothing to do with creating Bitcoin whatsoever ... and whoopsie ...

... well one can dream ...


Some games are only won by those who do not play.

The real satoshi would simply never say this ...

"Interviewer: "Hey Craig, how do you explain the 145 addressed that signed "Craig is a fraud" last week ?"

Craig: " No message was signed, you can't sign anonymously - you have to have an identity to sign....key don't count..I gotta go...be" 😂😂😂 "
https://twitter.com/BitcoinMemeHub/status/1268366834287312897

Source: REIMAGINE 2020 - Craig S. Wright - World Riots, Hard Work, Quantum Computing and more
- https://youtu.be/PHBrodzl5qY?t=5105

...

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_signature

"A digital signature is a mathematical scheme for verifying the authenticity of digital messages or documents. A valid digital signature, where the prerequisites are satisfied, gives a recipient very strong reason to believe that the message was created by a known sender (authentication), and that the message was not altered in transit (integrity).

Digital signatures are a standard element of most cryptographic protocol suites, and are commonly used for software distribution, financial transactions, contract management software, and in other cases where it is important to detect forgery or tampering..."

...

Back to the OP ... 145 addresses were signed and the messages are 100% verifiable on the blockchain.

These are addresses that Craig Wright told the court he owned / mined, in the 4th revision of the Tulip Trust, which is supposedly inaccessible.  

Valid Bitcoin messages can clearly be signed anonymously and no you don't have to have an identity for the message to be validated.

Moreover, the message does in fact contain an identity i.e. the anonymous address does NOT belong to Craig Wright.

The addresses could belong to anybody, but it categorically does not belong to Craig Wright.

Anyone who still thinks that 'Craig is Satoshi', based on this single piece of evidence alone, is a complete and utterly misguided fool.

and thats the pitfull you are falling into

we in the entire community know CSW is a pennyless scammer that never created or mined bitcoin pre2013
thats not in dispute.. apart from you and nutty's, and a couple others flip flops unsure/trolling thoughts.

what is actually ocurring is that ira's team is NOT calling out CSW as a pennyless scammer that duped dave into a pennyless scam. IRA's NOT fighting to clear daves name and get out/detach daves reputation from being 50% liable of the ATO and other scams.. ira's not seeking damages from CSW for trying to pull in dave into CSW's scam

instead ira's team ARE trying to ratify that there was a partnership and it has assets.
again they are not arguing who then should buy out who from that ratified partnership. they just both want to have it validated that there was a partnership which included bitcoin IP as its asset

..
but hey. you can play theories and if's and maybes.
but ira's requests for validation during the deposition/discovery stage. is very much tactics that CSW would play. its a similar play as the SLAPP tactic. get the desired outcome before the case has even started.

CSW wins even if IRA wins. as the only true costs CSW would pay is just the lawyers costs of both sides.
which i deem CSW has already conned his 'money guys' into covering as the cost of doing business to get a judge validated title. which can then be used in future SLAPP cases which he promises profits to his 'money guys'

but hey.
show me where IRA's team has said CSW is a pennyless scammer that had nothing to do with bitcoin pre2013 and just tried to con dave into a scam..(your assumptions of what this case actually is)

i do get it
we in the community know the actual scamminess of CSW. we know he was not involved in bitcoin pre2013. yes we wish IRA was a plaintiff of a case that called CSW out on his scams..
yes we wish IRa was trying to call detach any linkage to any partnership by showing there was not bitcoin business pre 2013
but the only stuff IRA is calling out on is the stall tactics within the case of not just coming out as bitcoins creator as promised/sooner.
thus ira's team is very much playing into the game of wanting CSW to be announced as bitcoins creator
.
i do get it
we all want CSW punished..
but that aint gonna happen. IRA is not making direct demand for 410k coin and asking the judge for a prison term punishment if CSW doesnt pay. heck even the judge said this case is not about awarding coins or proving who or where the coins are to then award.
this is not what the case is about. its not the coins.
its not even about who was typing at the computer to decide identity. its the 'title' and rights of being the creators of bitcoin.
(where by the judge would then let them both debate over the share of who was the identity and who should buy out who outside of court)

i do get it
CSW is a scammer and there is no asset. no coins nothing actually in reality to share. but inside the courtroom. is a different thing entirely

CSW likes this because while the trust ownership/validity is in question the ATO are stuck. even they cant proceed without it being validated that CSW is the owner of the scam. or if the scam was a scam
CSW likes this because the 2-3years delay allows him time to escape the statute of limitations of the current CIVIL case of non payment of ATO tax. which once outside the limitation period. the ATO cant then file criminal charges of evasion.
CSW likes this because ira is validating CSW claims by saying there was a partnership. meaning it keeps his 'money guys' happily funding CSW's many games while keeping the ATO at arms length

Damn...hard for the court not to infer that if CW gives all the BTC the Klieman estate says they are entitled too..... or do i have this wrong?

Of course, there are a few ways of saying it.  CSW, Calvin, et al have painted themselves into a corner, and they might not had been really realizing that they were being painted into a corner little by little.  Likely, that their predicament of a situation had become more and more clear, even to them, and logically, they believe that the ONLY way out would be to stay stubborn with their position and even to double down on their position, from time to time, hoping that they might come across some kind of way to weasel their way out of the painted corner in which they were finding themselves.

It may bear repeating that Ira and team, saw the stupid-ass outrageous claims that CSW, CA, et al were making about CSW being satoshi, that CSW had worked with Dave Kleinman to mine coins and supposedly invent BTC, and that CSW had possession of those coins which seemed to logically be partially owned by Dave, if such claims were true.  Therefore, Ira and team further forced CSW, CA, et al further into their lame-ass and seemingly lie of a corner, but instead of admitting that they were lying, they doubled down, which played into the hands of Ira to be able to get monetary damages.  That's where we continue to be.  CSW, CA, et al continue to refuse to give up, even though at one point last fall they seemed to have entered into a settlement, but they decided to renege on that settlement and take this evolving clown show to litigation...   Sure, there remains a question regarding whether this evolving clown show of preposterous claims is going to be taken on the record of actual court proceedings, which could make matters even worse for CSW, CA, et al to have sworn testimony that reinforces their ongoing lies.. not inadvertent lies, but ongoing intentional lies that become more and more apparent and more and more formalized as an attempt to scam the whole judicial system with their webbed doubling-down pattern of forgeries, fraudulent actions and misrepresentations.

I'm 99.9999% and a few more 9's percent certain that this case will eventually go to trial ...

The entire thing is a complete and utter sham, apparently based on a nullity. (Derivative suit, much?).

...

The reality most likely was ...

The real satoshi released bitcoin here:

Bitcoin v0.1 released - Thu Jan 8 14:27:40 EST 2009
- https://www.metzdowd.com/pipermail/cryptography/2009-January/014994.html

Dave Kleiman likely saw and/or got notification of the bitcoin release here:

[heise online UK] Secure deletion: a single overwrite will do it - Tue Jan 20 19:18:39 EST 2009
- https://www.metzdowd.com/pipermail/cryptography/2009-January/015029.html

January 2009 Archives by thread
- https://www.metzdowd.com/pipermail/cryptography/2009-January/thread.html

Remembering that Dave was effectively housebound in his wheelchair and he was a digital forensic investigator, therefore he most certainly downloaded and ran the bitcoin software. Maybe he mined some, maybe he did not, who knows?

Perhaps he told Craig Wright about it at the time, perhaps he did not ... presumably Craig's response at the time might of been something to the effect of "Cypherpunk BS, won't go anywhere", again, who knows?

The rest is history, as they say ...

Quote: Arthur van Pelt @MyLegacyKit

"I've changed the layout a little to a yearly "Lies, Forgeries & Frauds" timeline and will now go concentrate on the content details. Keep you posted. This is a pretty massive undertaking, especially when I go unravel the ATO and Edman reports in detail. "
- https://twitter.com/MyLegacyKit/status/1280422503974928384

---

*Satire*



and/or

"THIS FACILITY CANNOT ACCEPT: DIRT"   

Alice In Chains - Down in a Hole (PCM Stereo)
- https://youtu.be/f8hT3oDDf6c