Trump Bans Venezuela's New National Cryptocurrency (cnbc.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from CNBC: President Donald Trump issued an executive order Monday banning any transactions within the United States involving any digital currency issued by, for, or on behalf of the Government of Venezuela. The order applies to U.S. citizens as well as anyone within the United States, and includes cryptocurrency issued on or after January 9. President Trump's order is in response to recent attempts by Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro's regime to "circumvent U.S. sanctions by issuing a digital currency," the White House said in a statement. Venezuela launched its oil-backed cryptocurrency in February to help pull the country out of a continuing economic crisis. President Maduro said each petro token will be backed by one barrel of the state's national petroleum. Maduro also said roughly 100 million tokens would be issued -- estimated to be worth around $6 billion. Bitcoin prices dropped about $200 to around $8,388, according to Coinbase, following the order.

Comments

What about Russia's chemical attack on England

[Anonymous Coward]

Russia attacked a NATO country and Donald Trump is still sucking Vladimir Putin's dick.

Lock this traitor up right fucking now.

Re:What about Russia's chemical attack on England

[Rakarra]

Russia attacked a NATO country and Donald Trump is still sucking Vladimir Putin's dick.

Lock this traitor up right fucking now.

The US issued sanctions as a result of the polonium assassination, it might issue more in response to this.
This particular action is in response to Venezuela's attempt to circumvent existing sanctions.

Re:What about Russia's chemical attack on England

[Anonymous Coward]

Trump's new sanctions he announced last week aren't enough.

Re: What about Russia's chemical attack on England

[Anonymous Coward]

Catch up idiot. Try to read more and run your mouth less.

Re:What about Russia's chemical attack on England

[Anonymous Coward]

Buy yourself a ticket and go fight Vlad yourself, you fuck.

No more wars for oil.

Re:What about Russia's chemical attack on England

[Anonymous Coward]

Fuck you, you fuck. We'll send you and all the other traitors.

Re: What about Russia's chemical attack on England

[Anonymous Coward]

Breaking News, Trump bans fake currency that nobody uses. Declairs success.

Re:What about Russia's chemical attack on England

[Khyber]

"Buy yourself a ticket and go fight Vlad yourself, you fuck."

You do realize that anyone doing this would automatically be committing an act of war on behalf of their home country, yes?

Re: What about Russia's chemical attack on England

[ancientt]

Breaking News, Trump bans fake currency that nobody uses. Declairs success.

Update: Trump denies any ties with campaign contributors who made a killing investing in a fake currency nobody had heard of before he talked about it and it's value doubled overnight.

Re:What about Russia's chemical attack on England

[Anonymous Coward]

Khyber, international law is not your forté. The actions of a single private citizen, acting on their own initiative, would simply be criminal. The definition of "act of war" is pretty loose, but generally one does need a reason to pin the violence on the government. Legally, a casus belli is also supposed to be a last resort, and it's kinda tough to imagine any individual making Russia say, "We can't even with this guy, we need to declare war on the US just to kill him." If you want to go to war, you're expected to either try some other ways to resolve your issues, or at least to make a good show of doing so, and Putin is too busy giggling like a schoolgirl over the success of his schemes to do any such thing.

Re: What about Russia's chemical attack on England

[Anonymous Coward]

Corporate whores sure love their propaganda. Hard to know where to start with this crowd. Corporate whore war profiteer world bank cocksucking going on across both aisles while they scream their favorite false narratives at each other.

Re:What about Russia's chemical attack on England

[Vinegar Joe]

Russia attacked a NATO country and Donald Trump is still sucking Vladimir Putin's dick.

I suggest you join the Army.

Re:What about Russia's chemical attack on England

[mlw4428]

It'd be a war to help a US ally illegally invaded by Russia and as a check on recent Russian aggression including the use of nerve gas on British (an ally of ours) citizens. Your hostility and attempt to deflect the underlying reason for military action suggests you're politically motivated. Tell me, do you like Vodka and beating women and driving on your nation's sidewalks?

Re:What about Russia's chemical attack on England

[Anonymous Coward]

It's true cause your still in tears over the election?
You morons are the sole reason Trump won, rage more please rage more it's comedy gold.

Re:What about Russia's chemical attack on England

[Anonymous Coward]

It’s this kind of mature and thoughtful dialog that keeps me coming back. Thanks!

Re:What about Russia's chemical attack on England

[Khyber]

"The actions of a single private citizen, acting on their own initiative, would simply be criminal."

Not directly against Vlad or any other world leader, it would not be. Please try again when you've got the context actually locked down.

banks

[Anonymous Coward]

It's all about currency control by his fellow swamp dwellers. this time, the banks.

Does Dear Leader

[Anonymous Coward]

Have the authority to do this? Like Obama the executive branch keeps getting more and more audacious with these executive orders.

Re:Does Dear Leader

[Anonymous Coward]

No, he does not. He can ban it from the government, but he has zero authority to tell individuals or companies what they can and can't accept as payment for goods or services.

Re:Does Dear Leader

[omnichad]

I'm going to say no. He's not telling the government what to do. He's trying to make something illegal (aka against the law).

He's trying to cite emergency powers:

International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) (IEEPA), the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.)

And I think it would be awfully hard to call this a national emergency for us. On the other hand, it was Barack Obama that called it an emergency, and this new executive order merely cites it: https://www.federalregister.go...

So yes, these executive orders are getting out of hand.

Re:Does Dear Leader

[GrumpySteen]

The embargo of trade with Cuba was initiated by an executive order, so there's strong precedence for it.

Re: Does Dear Leader

[Anonymous Coward]

Wrong.

Re: Does Dear Leader

[Anonymous Coward]

You don't have a fucking clue, little boy. Go back to bed, you have school tomorrow.

Re:Does Dear Leader

[Anonymous Coward]

So yes, these executive orders are getting out of hand.

Except when it's an executive order your side likes. Whichever side you're on, keep that in mind when you defend an executive order. If it's bad for one, it's bad for both. If it's good for one, it's good for both.

Re:Does Dear Leader

[Anonymous Coward]

"like obama"

lolololol... go play on T_D or 8chan, troll

Re:Does Dear Leader

[omnichad]

Both "sides" appear to like it. This was handed from Obama to Trump and both have some severe overstep on executive orders. In either case, I've disliked any sort of unchecked power in government - and executive orders were supposed to be part of the checks and balances against legislative power (mostly regarding selective enforcement of the law - which is an executive branch privilege).

Re: Does Dear Leader

[orlanz]

In this case, yes. There are already sanctions in place. The executive is responsible for enforcing them.

As Venezuela is trying to bypass them, he is responsible for and authorized to curtail those workarounds.

Re: Does Dear Leader

[Anonymous Coward]

Spring break, actually ;^)

Re:Does Dear Leader

[Applehu Akbar]

Have the authority to do this? Like Obama the executive branch keeps getting more and more audacious with these executive orders.

In particular, does this mean that we can no longer gas up at Citgo stations?

Re:Does Dear Leader

[PrimaryConsult]

The executive branch enforces the laws. Unless there exists a law that violating this ban would also infringe, someone with enough money to see this through court can get it blocked or overturned.

Of course Joe Blow in his basement buying some crypto-bolivars (or whatever) would have no ability to stop the SS* from dragging him from his home, shooting his dog, and destroying his computers...

As in Secret Service, who deals with currency related issues, but pun partially intended.

Re:Does Dear Leader

[Anonymous Coward]

I voted for Trump so this is my side. I also like sanctions against Venezuela. No I do not support this action as it oversteps the executive branch. Remember abuse of emergency powers is how Hitler became supreme leader. Even if you support Trump like I have you must always remember to keep him and any president in check even if he is your guy. Hitler did some very good things for Germany before he went ape shit and destroyed half the world killing innocents on the way.

Re: Does Dear Leader

[Anonymous Coward]

given the poor education in 'murika, there shouldn't be a spring break or any other. adults have to work year 'round. fucking yard apes should be in school year 'round too, prep them for the real world.

Re:Does Dear Leader

[LynnwoodRooster]

Per executive order 13692, you cannot send any property to Venezuela. The IRS considers cryptocurrencies as property. Thus trading - sending or buying - in Venezuelan crypto is not legal. Unless, of course, the underlying executive order is illegal - but that's not been determined yet.

Based on the above, it is quite clear that President Trump didn't add anything new, just explicitly listed Venezuela's cryptocurrency as banned - which it already was, per the earlier EO and existing IRS statutes.

Re:Does Dear Leader

[letthelightin]

Considering that US citizenship is a voluntary contract that no American Citizen is required to become, everyone who has accepted the benefits of US citizenship is obligated to by contract to follow said rules.

Most Americans have no idea that US citizenship is a product of the Reconstructive Era (post civil war) and was created for recently freed slaves to have standing in court, which by the original constitution they were considered property. The original constitution has yet to be properly amended within the legal courses of actions necessary to make such thing legitimate.

TLDR: American Law, and the legislative system, was Royally fucked during the civil war, and no American Citizen (state Citizen) is required to be a Federal citizen, as created by and defined by the 14th amendment.

If you are using a social security number (which does not belong to you, but belongs to the US Federal Government (the "United States")) then you are voluntarily contracting as a federal citizen, and you are VOLUNTARILY SUBSERVIENT to the federal government, having, as one of the sovereign People, placed yourself in a contractual agreement for "benefits".

Re:Does Dear Leader

[Anonymous Coward]

Precisely, he has the authority to prohibit US banks from doing business with any person or oganizaion that does business with corrupt Venezuelan officials. This ban is not only well within his authority, but consistent with the intent of the legislation directing the economic embargo against the Venezuelan dicator and his cronies.

Re: Does Dear Leader

[Anonymous Coward]

Also the aspect of money laundering, embezzlement, extortion, drug trafficking, and just about every other thing found on the dark web that may accept a cryptocurrency which would violate the laws the executive branch is charged with carrying out... But because it was Trump, then it must be terrible.

Re: Does Dear Leader

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, executive orders were created as a tool to swiftly enact a response until a law could be put into place. Since Trump puts time limits on his, what is the problem? If Congress wants to do this, they have their role, but in the short term, any president has his or hers.

Re: Does Dear Leader

[HiThere]

If he enforced it the way you are indicating, then I suspect there'd be a lot less criticism. As it is this looks like political bullying.

Re:Does Dear Leader

[HiThere]

IIUC the US has officially been under emergency powers since sometime during WWII. I never heard that they were repealed, and I believe that they were implemented without a sunset clause.

Re: Does Dear Leader

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you sure? The Cubs travel ban covered US citizens not just government employees.

Re:Does Dear Leader

[ancientt]

Stupid executive orders are good for the long term goal of freedom. Stupid executive orders get challenged in court, overturned and as a result, they create a sort of self regulating system. More stupid executive orders getting made means more of them getting overturned by the courts. The result is that fewer stupid executive orders will happen in the future.

I hope.

The cynic in me has to note that stupid people get power and stupid people support it. It's hard to trust that stupidity will limit itself.

Re:Does Dear Leader

[ancientt]

The president is supposed to have some control over the enforcement of laws. That makes sense because the president has the authority to determine how the budget is spent (or not spent) and to pardon people who have been convicted of breaking the law. In theory, the president could pardon everyone convicted of breaking a law that he/she disagreed with.

When the president says "we order this" what it should always mean is that the law either supports his/her desire and he/she is deciding to spend budget money on it, or the law is against his/her desire and he/she is deciding to not spend budget money on it or is granting a pardon to anyone who breaks said law.

This seems to be a case of the president saying a law should be enforced that most citizens wouldn't have known was even in existence. I have some doubts as to how effective an attempt to enforce it will be, but thanks to /., I am better informed about the laws supporting it than I would have been otherwise.

Sidenote: I'm trying to be open minded with the "he/she" bit, but it's a nuisance to type. Nothing else works, so I'm about to go back to just typing "he" for convenience despite recognizing the possibility that it could apply to a "she" just as well in the future.

Re: Does Dear Leader

[Anonymous Coward]

Bullying whom? The US dollar exchanged with the Venezuelan official currency is currently barred under a legally defined set of designated sanctions. So their government offering a cryptocurrency is a means to sidestep that very restriction through what is essentially playing semantics. Please explain to me how the Venezuelan government is being bullied by an executive order specifically barring an attempt to defeat what was explicitly called out in the official sanctions? If ever there was a reason for an executive order, this was it. This keeps the status quo without increasing sanctions and doesn't allow a decrease from inaction either.

Re:Does Dear Leader

[omnichad]

This seems to be a case of the president saying a law should be enforced that most citizens wouldn't have known was even in existence

No, it's not. The law that's in existence gives the president emergency powers during a national emergency to enact things like this. It's definitely in existence and used to great effect. It was used 6 times between 1977 and 2000. All but one of those is easily obvious in matching the intent and scope of the law. In the last 18 years, it's been used 22 more times. The validity of the "national emergency" in question on most of those is very doubtful.

The point, though, is that this isn't the president using his enforcement powers. It's declaring a false "national emergency" to claim power that they should have no rights to. And emergency powers tend to go beyond the law because it's supposed to be a temporary emergency where congress would act too slowly to ensure the safety of the American people. And yet this national emergency in question was declared in 2015 by our former president. 3 years is quite a while for a temporary emergency with no perceivable threat to national security.

Re:Does Dear Leader

[rtb61]

I reckon he has a global fiscal authority, might be more peaceful if the US gets to be the core of a global energy futures crypto currency, no need for energy wars, global transaction currency solved, tied individual to national currencies and in turn the energy those countries are capable of supplying or the goods and services to buy that energy. A global transaction market, no competitors allowed. Then again it might be just a useful if they weren't, little be rougher but still the same largely conflict free market in the end (that might be a better way of defining the free market a 'a conflict free, market', probably more sensible too).

Re:Does Dear Leader

[Anonymous Coward]

Since 1979 under Jimmy Carter. The ones FDR put in place have expired. They all have to be renewed yearly and there are something like 30 of them in place. Long story short the president can declare a national emergency for really anything he wants. Its just a BS loop hole to subvert our system of government and you can thank the lazy inept Congress critters who failed us and our country. They are being used currently to do everything from the war on drugs, illegal detention and torture of terrorists, forced active duty of some 20,000 national guardsman, and lots more lovely things. Under the loop hole (if you actually believe it to be valid) the president could "legally" turn the US into the same style government as North Korea. That probably wouldn't happen now because the armed forces and the armed citizens would revolt but it would be "legal". None of these national emergency laws actually supersede the constitution but our government has been treating them like they do since the 70s. All of this I thought was chem trail crazy until I recently researched it and...well I was surprised.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2014/10/22/president-obama-states-of-emergency/16851775/

Re:Does Dear Leader

[thegarbz]

Like Obama the executive branch keeps getting more and more audacious with these executive orders.

You mean like how Obama has issued the lowest number of executive orders of any president in the past 125 years (corrected for length of sitting term)?

Re:Does Dear Leader

[Anonymous Coward]

The new order may ban crypto being used or traded. But clearly the order you posted and the claim you made is false. Or else why the need for a new order?
Trading, using, sending, spendin, whatever elsing is not sending property to Venezuela any more than me handing a US dollar to someone outside the US is sending it to America. You really don't know how crypto works, or currencies, or how to link relevant things to support an 'argument'.

Re:Does Dear Leader

[DamnOregonian]

Trump actually first prohibited Americans from dealing in a whole list of financial instruments tied to the Venezuelan government back in August. This particular order has almost identical text, only specifically targeting the cryptocurrency.
The law specifically requires such emergencies to be extended annually, or they sunset.. Interestingly enough, The order was renewed in 2016, and 2017, but not 2018... Technically speaking, this order may not be legal, since as far as I can tell, the state of emergency ended on January 13, 2018. Of course he could fix that with another continuing order...

Re: Does Dear Leader

[DamnOregonian]

Also horseshit. Executive orders were created so that there was a formal way to issue direction to the Federal Government. They do not make law, they are not above the law. Of course, should an order be illegal, you're welcome to argue against whatever jackbooted thugs the government sends at your ass until you get your day in court to have the order struck down, so there's certainly an element of de facto law creation, until it's struck down.

This order, like all other orders, cite the laws that empower the President to issue the order. Congress already has the check in place, and Trump's administration is following the rules, minus the small procedural problem of he may have let the state of emergency sunset this January because his administration is fucking inept. But that can be fixed easily enough with another order.

Re:Does Dear Leader

[Anonymous Coward]

I feel that was an attempt of his to be somewhat neutral, instead of sucking off one political party too much. But please, troll, keep sucking your chosen political party off and wipe that Kool-Aid spooge off your filthy chin.

Re: Does Dear Leader

[bluefoxlucid]

Sure. Economic sanctions. That power to force good men and women at the bottom end of poverty to suffer, starve, and die, despite having done nothing, because some of the dear leaders in their country haven't danced to your tune.

Did you want terrorists? Because this is how you get terrorists.

Re:Does Dear Leader

[Anonymous Coward]

Have the Liberals changed their mind yet about Venezuela being a socialist heaven?
The left has a love affair socialist country's and socialism creates only dictators.
When Pol Pot took over Cambodia the NY times wrote a better life for all, they never apologized.

Re:Does Dear Leader

[Anonymous Coward]

Per executive order 13692, you cannot send any property to Venezuela.

The executive order states that you cannot send property to a list of people in Venezuela, not to the whole country. Otherwise, US companies wouldn't be able to operate here.

Re: Does Dear Leader

[Anonymous Coward]

Did you just rephrase what the GP said and call it horse shit in the same sentence? I love /. logic

Re: Does Dear Leader

[Anonymous Coward]

Cite your source. And executive orders honoring military deaths or declaring holidays or days or remembrance dont count.

Re:Does Dear Leader

[omnichad]

It's still not a valid "national emergency." Renewed or not, this is a presidential power that has been granted too much overreach with no oversight. The order in August is just as bad. As is the original declaration of emergency by Obama in 2015. Being able to declare just about anything an "emergency" in order to have dictatorial powers is just plain fundamentally against the nature of our government's design. I could only hope that this is the last straw that finally gets attention at the issue, but it's unlikely.

Re:Does Dear Leader

[DamnOregonian]

It has complete oversight... This power is enumerated by statute. It was given to the president, and they are free to remove it. The fact is, the Congress agrees with its use.

Re:Does Dear Leader

[omnichad]

Whether congress agrees has nothing to do with it. The fact that it was enacted without any oversight provisions makes it de facto unconstitutional. The fact that it lets the executive branch effectively act as the legislative branch during peacetime is also the same.

Re:Does Dear Leader

[DamnOregonian]

The fact that it was enacted without any oversight provisions makes it de facto unconstitutional

You either don't know what de facto means, or you're not familiar with the structure of the US government, as laid out in the Constitution.
The Congress is absolutely free to empower the President to prohibit things. Are you trying to claim that all regulations under the control of regulatory agencies (The Executive branch) are unconstitutional? I think you need to go back to school, buddy.

he missed some

[Anonymous Coward]

He meant all kryptokurrency, not just Venezualas.

/sarcasm Let's ban Math while we are at it !

[UnknownSoldier]

This is retarded. "Banning" cryptocurrency is akin to trying to ban Math. Yeah, good luck with that.

Hypothetical: So if I "own" Venezuelan cryptocoin will I be hauled off to jail ???

Hypothetical: If I leave the U.S., say go visit Canada, can I then "buy" Venezuelan cryptocoins?

Re:/sarcasm Let's ban Math while we are at it !

[DontBeAMoran]

"The order applies to U.S. citizens as well as anyone within the United States."

So no, you cannot legally buy Venezuelan cryptocoins, ever. Trump said so!

Re:/sarcasm Let's ban Math while we are at it !

[Anonymous Coward]

It sounds like you are speaking from a place of ignorance.

Trump didn't ban some abstract concept. He banned a class of transactions. You know, where you give some money and get something, or vice-versa. These are relatively easy-to-understand kinds of actions. And a specific variety of them has been banned.

And yes, you can own cryptocurrencies. This is really basic stuff.

And yes, you can be punished for violating the ban, if you get caught. I don't know offhand what the punishments are, or how that is enforced. Obviously, you don't either. But you seem to be responding to your own ignorance by stating that the idea is logically absurd. No, it has been around for quite a long time. And it applies just fine.

Re:/sarcasm Let's ban Math while we are at it !

[subanark]

This is not a "pure" cryptocurrency. Each unit is backed by a barrel of oil. It can only be created by Venezuela. The crypto part simply is a way of transferring it.

In short, you can't mine it and you pretty much have to obtain it from Venezuela government directly or indirectly.

Re:/sarcasm Let's ban Math while we are at it !

[omnichad]

"Banning" cryptocurrency is akin to trying to ban Math. Yeah, good luck with that.

Banning math is not exactly new.

Re:/sarcasm Let's ban Math while we are at it !

[HornWumpus]

Trump is giving it more credibility than it deserves.

It should just sink without a glug. Would you buy currency from this nation at their exchange rate?

Re:/sarcasm Let's ban Math while we are at it !

[omnichad]

legally

Funny word you chose. Now cite the law in question.

Re:/sarcasm Let's ban Math while we are at it !

[mi]

It is fairly common for /.-ers to not bother reading TFA. But the answers to your "sarcastic" questions are right there in the write-up — you didn't have to click away to read them...

So if I "own" Venezuelan cryptocoin will I be hauled off to jail ???

The executive order bans transactions — not ownership. If you own it, you aren't subject to any punishment until you try to sell it.

If I leave the U.S., say go visit Canada, can I then "buy" Venezuelan cryptocoins?

If you are a US citizen, you will be violating the order — and become subject to whatever punishment prescribed. Not very different from the ban on travel to Cuba, for example — it was illegal, but people did manage to get away with it.

Perhaps more importantly is why would you seek to circumvent this one... Maduro's government is even more stupid and evil than Chavez' was — and Chavez managed to not only destroy Venezuela's economy, the rate of murders and rapes quadrupled during the first 15 years of his rein (even before oil price tanked). Are you just as critical about US sanctions against Russia?..

If, as I suspect, you are motivated simply by the desire to "stick it" to Trump, I urge you to move to Venezuela permanently...

Re:/sarcasm Let's ban Math while we are at it !

[jwhyche]

I'm not exactly certain that Lord Trump can tell me what I can and can't spend my money on. Last time I checked Congress made the laws, not the office of the President.

Re:/sarcasm Let's ban Math while we are at it !

[bgrahambo]

Typical comment section troll; has no idea of the contents that he's commenting on. As all other executive orders do, this executive order lists the laws cited in the first paragraph: "By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) (IEEPA), the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code,"

Re:/sarcasm Let's ban Math while we are at it !

[Raul654]

Congress already gave him the authority: 50 U.S. Code  1701 and 50 U.S. Code  1702

Re: /sarcasm Let's ban Math while we are at it !

[Anonymous Coward]

Check again. It's changed in recent years. Remember how 9/11 "changed everything"? Well this is what it changed? After all the constitution is "just a God damned piece of paper," and the democrats have never disagreed with that. It just took the republicans some coming around to the idea. God bless Amerika, comrade!

Re:/sarcasm Let's ban Math while we are at it !

[Anonymous Coward]

He can cite all he want's, unless the courts agree with him it means squat.

Making something illegal that was previously legal is a legislative act, using "emergency" powers during peace time is gonna be a hard thing to argue in the courts.

Re:/sarcasm Let's ban Math while we are at it !

[omnichad]

That makes him able to make an executive order. It doesn't make it a law or any American's actions illegal. Obama calling Venezuala's situation a "national emergency" for us is highly questionable - and from there, that makes anything predicated on that really shaky to start with.

Re:/sarcasm Let's ban Math while we are at it !

[Anonymous Coward]

So this is a declared "National Emergency"?

"The authorities granted to the President by section 1702 of this title may only be exercised to deal with an unusual and extraordinary threat with respect to which a national emergency has been declared "

Re:/sarcasm Let's ban Math while we are at it !

[Anonymous Coward]

(A) Asset blocking.—The exercise of all powers granted to the President by the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) to the extent necessary to block and prohibit all transactions in all property and interests in property of a person determined by the President to be subject to subsection (a) if such property and interests in property are in the United States, come within the United States, or are or come within the possession or control of a United States person.

There's an entire part about Venezula. I guess this is above board.

Re: /sarcasm Let's ban Math while we are at it !

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree. The Trump administration is completely irrational to spend time and EO emergency power on this. It will die on the vine like any other terrible investment.

Re:/sarcasm Let's ban Math while we are at it !

[PrimaryConsult]

Why is AC being downmodded - Trump can't even get the courts to allow things he *is* allowed to regulate, like immigration. Nothing about this is an emergency - Venezuela isn't going to take the pennies Americans might throw at their new currency and build WMDs with it. If there's fear that the new currency will somehow take away our stranglehold on the price of oil, banning it from America will do fuck all to stop the global markets from using it anyway.

Re:/sarcasm Let's ban Math while we are at it !

[PrimaryConsult]

Perhaps more importantly is why would you seek to circumvent this one... Maduro's government is even more stupid and evil [elpais.com] than Chavez' was

One valid reason to want to put your hat in the ring is if it actually goes somewhere, getting in on the ground floor can make you a lot of money. Evil can be profitable, and for those that do not believe in some form of karma, afterlife, or divine punishment, there's no logical reason to not take advantage provided any potential punishment is outweighed by the profit. See: the premise of Breaking Bad.

Re:/sarcasm Let's ban Math while we are at it !

[LynnwoodRooster]

Per the EO, if you owned the Venezuelan cryptocoin before January 9th, 2018 - you can keep owning. If you trade it, sell it, give it away, or purchase more - you're in trouble.

Re:/sarcasm Let's ban Math while we are at it !

[AHuxley]

Its like banning banking. No new cash flows to a failed nation.
Cryptocurrency is just another way of sneaking in new funding.

Re:/sarcasm Let's ban Math while we are at it !

[losfromla]

True. However, because it's tied to oil (unlike bitcoin which is tied to nothing), isn't the upside potential only ever the price of a barrel of oil? I'm not too bullish on oil long term, though I admit others might have good reasons for feeling that there is nowhere to go but up with oil... So, unfair though it might be, because this petro-coin is tied to something tangible, its value might be very limited.

Re:/sarcasm Let's ban Math while we are at it !

[ancientt]

Ideally you'd invest in it right before POTUS brings it to everyone's attention then dump it right after.

Re:/sarcasm Let's ban Math while we are at it !

[Anonymous Coward]

No it doesn't say anything like that. Please show why you think that is the case. Try the tiniest bit of evidence, or common sense.

Re:/sarcasm Let's ban Math while we are at it !

[LynnwoodRooster]

Here you go:

On Monday, President Donald Trump signed an executive order that prohibits transactions inside the U.S. that involve “any digital currency, digital coin or digital token” issued by the Venezuelan government after January 9.

Transactions do NOT include previous ownership. If you owned it prior to January 9th, you can keep it - you just can't trade, exchange, or redeem it.

Re:/sarcasm Let's ban Math while we are at it !

[Anonymous Coward]

This is retarded. "Banning" cryptocurrency is akin to trying to ban Math. Yeah, good luck with that.

It already happens with cryptography export regulations and people have been convicted. And if you want to get silly, ultimately everything is maths at the quantum level, so every law is a prohibition of maths yet it seems to work ok most of the time...

Re:/sarcasm Let's ban Math while we are at it !

[DamnOregonian]

Awfully snarky of you. The law is right there in the order. I'm not even a Trump supporter, but there is nothing even remotely fishy about this order. There are literally a couple dozen of orders under this statute in place.

I shouldn't have to do this, but I will anyway.
https://www.treasury.gov/resou... Enjoy.

Re:/sarcasm Let's ban Math while we are at it !

[DamnOregonian]

AC is being downmodded because AC is ignorant and has no idea what he is talking about. So, apparently, are the people who moderated you.

Where Congress empowers a President to declare an action prohibited or not (which they do in hundreds of aspects of American life) he has that power. In this case, they did, and he did. All's happy and legal. Nothing weird here. Just ignorant people on Slashdot who bitch and moan and call names, too stupid to learn the system, and therefor too stupid to fix it.

Re:/sarcasm Let's ban Math while we are at it !

[radarskiy]

There are 30 states of emergency in effect at the federal level. Take your pick.

Re:/sarcasm Let's ban Math while we are at it !

[Cederic]

The wording you quoted says nothing about ownership, it says you can't transact in a currency that was issued after 9th January.

Isn't 9th January when Venezuela announced and issued the digital currency? You can't own it before then because it didn't exist.

If you bought some last week then according to the sentence you quoted you're in the clear, but I haven't read the actual executive order.

Re:/sarcasm Let's ban Math while we are at it !

[bluefoxlucid]

Chavez managed to not only destroy Venezuela's economy

What are economic sanctions for?

Re:/sarcasm Let's ban Math while we are at it !

[LynnwoodRooster]

The wording you quoted says nothing about ownership, it says you can't transact in a currency that was issued after 9th January.

Correct. And in the US, if something is not prohibited by law, it is implicitly legal. There is probably no law that says you can walk from your front door to your car, does that make you guilty of a crime?

Re:/sarcasm Let's ban Math while we are at it !

[Anonymous Coward]

If you own bitcoin you're in even bigger trouble now with child porn laws. Safer to use the Venezuelan version.

For Trump, socialism==bad...

[greenwow]

so thus a knee-jerk reaction.

Re:For Trump, socialism==bad...

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you seen what socialism has done to Venezuela, a country with vast energy natural resources per capita?
This is not a knee-jerk reaction.

Re:For Trump, socialism==bad...

[CaptainDork]

That word doesn't apply the way you think it does.

Re:For Trump, socialism==bad...

[LynnwoodRooster]

Can you point to a socialist society that works well? (one where they are actually socialist, in action, not just name)

Re:For Trump, socialism==bad...

[Anonymous Coward]

you meant "have you seen what happens to a country that so badly managed and is corrupt". The fact it has natural resources to exploit and is still an economic failure has nothing to do with "socialism", its because of unadulterated greed and avarice. You know, the same problems all western society countries have. with 'murika leading the way downhill.

Re:For Trump, socialism==bad...

[losfromla]

Norway, Sweden, Finland. Germany, France, and Italy have socialist tendencies as well. Unchecked corporate greed gets you 'murika which is demonstrably bad for most.

Re:For Trump, socialism==bad...

[LynnwoodRooster]

Capitalist economies with strong social nets (in particular, it's called the which is a free market, capitalistic economy with a strong social net. Same thing for Germany, etc. They are NOT socialist countries, which is "characterised by social ownership and democratic control of the means of production".

Re:For Trump, socialism==bad...

[Anonymous Coward]

Can you point to a socialist society that works well? (one where they are actually socialist, in action, not just name)

I smell a no true Scotsmen excuse coming....

Even the USA can be defined as half-socialist since you have many public services funded by the state.

And before you respond with your lame ass excuse, Soviet Russia was never 100% socialist, nor has the US ever been 100% capitalist. All countries exist somewhere in the middle, with the most successful, highest quality of life ones (North Western Europe, Canada, Australia, New Zealand etc) being socialist leaning.

Re:For Trump, socialism==bad...

[Anonymous Coward]

No true Scotsman! I claim my 50 cents...

Re:For Trump, socialism==bad...

[Anonymous Coward]

So why do all those countries do business outside their countries to avoid high tax rates and employee salaries?

Re:For Trump, socialism==bad...

[Anonymous Coward]

Can you point to a socialist one that doesn't...

Re:For Trump, socialism==bad...

[Megol]

Fascist regimes can also be corrupt. Socialism in itself (whether that word really applies to Venezuela or not) isn't the problem.

The main problem is an authoritarian regime intent to keep control by any means, illegally enriching supporters and punishing others.

Re:For Trump, socialism==bad...

[Megol]

For some it's part of a magical incantation... Others use other "strong words" without knowing the meaning of them, fascist is a popular one.

Re:For Trump, socialism==bad...

[Megol]

So for you socialism is only the end-stage of Marxism? Hilarious!

Re:For Trump, socialism==bad...

[Anonymous Coward]

Never discuss politics with an American.
They'll tell you that Socialism is Communism; Communism is Fascism; Fascism is Democracy; And, that Democracy is Mercantilism.

Re:For Trump, socialism==bad...

[Anonymous Coward]

Can you point to a socialist society that works well? (one where they are actually socialist, in action, not just name)

I smell a no true Scotsmen excuse coming....

Even the USA can be defined as half-socialist since you have many public services funded by the state.

False. Socialism, by definition, means the workers control the means of production. This primarily applies to family owned businesses in the US, which is nowhere near half- of anything. There are a few corporations here and there that actually are worker owned as well, but overall neither of these is significant in the economy.

If you see a small animal that eats mice, do you call it a duck? Or do you call it a cat? Definitions are important if you want to communicate effectively.

All countries exist somewhere in the middle, with the most successful, highest quality of life ones (North Western Europe, Canada, Australia, New Zealand etc) being socialist leaning.

For some reason, the educational systems in the EU are unable to teach their students the difference between socialism and capitalism, or to understand the importance of getting the meaning of words right. Perhaps because it's not a question on the tests.

In any event, you get a lot of EU folks claiming that states such as Norway, Sweden, Finland. Germany, France, and Italy are socialist. It's not true for any of them: they all have some share of their economy in family owned businesses, of course, and probably some worker owned corporations, but that share is not significant enough to call these states socialist or even socialist leaning. They are cats, not ducks.

Norway actually comes the closest in terms of economically significant measures, but that's because the North Sea Oil is owned on behalf of every citizen - and that's a huge component of Norway's GDP (30%). If you take that out of the equation as historical anomaly, the rest of the society is not particularly socialist.

Having a strong, well-run welfare system does not make a state socialist: welfare historically existed in many societies for centuries before the word socialism was even coined. All of the states in the list above - and the USA - are correctly described as capitalist welfare states, meaning that capitalism is used to pay for a fairly large welfare system.

The big differences between countries (from an economics perspective) lie in how much corruption and unethical practice of law they tolerate getting in the way of having a well-run welfare system. EU nations have plenty of corruption, but not absurd amounts.

The USA, on the other hand, is willing to tolerate absurd amounts of corruption at higher levels in the government (not so much at lower levels - less than some EU nations). The USA is also willing to tolerate absurd levels of unethical practice of law - the phrase "Land of the Lawsuit" doesn't even begin to describe the full scope of the legal ethics problem, or the enormous negative economic impact it has. See "The Captured Economy" for more details.

Hence the USA has a terrible welfare system (including health care), it does a very poor job of taking care of people, and has massive over-concentration of wealth.

Disparity of wealth is not a bad thing (incentives are important, witness the economic changes in the former Eastern Block states, China, and India since they all finally recognized this), but it can be taken too far - especially when taken across generations. Progressive taxes help a lot in creating a healthy economy over the long term - but only if the tax system isn't riddled with loopholes (one of the many consequences of tolerating unethical practice of law - the lawyers have a vested interest in writing/implementing/maintaining very complex laws as that creates an artificial demand for the services of their profession - and complex lots create lots of places to hide loopholes).

Re:For Trump, socialism==bad...

[LynnwoodRooster]

I'm going by what Wikipedia defines as socialism: "The economic and social systems characterised by social ownership and democratic control of the means of production". That doesn't sound like what happens in Scandinavia, does it? Do the people own all production, and there is a democratic control of that production? No?

Debt

[SmaryJerry]

If someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but as I understood from a previous article, the Venezuelan government is not allowed to issue debt on their oil by even their own laws. But by issuing cryptocurrency it is essentially selling notes exchangeable for oil they can't provide (so basically debt). That is an interesting thought about what cryptocurrency is really. We know regular currency is basically debt exchangeable for goods, so cryptocurrency is the same but where is the value of crytocurrency coming from? Basically all large companies stopped accepting bitcoin and even dark markets are switching their coin from bitcoin because it is too traceable.. I just don't see how bitcoin is even maintaining it's current price because if you can't buy anything with it then what use is it? I guess does anyone know what you can still buy with bitcoin?

Re:Debt

[drinkypoo]

I just don't see how bitcoin is even maintaining it's current price because if you can't buy anything with it then what use is it? I guess does anyone know what you can still buy with bitcoin?

You can still trade bitcoin for legal currency, as long as you can find someone who wants your bitcoin. You know, like any kind of currency. It's good for moving money around the planet when the authorities don't want you to, but won't actually raise a finger to stop you. It doesn't hide the transaction, but it does make possible transactions which banks won't make.

Re:Debt

[Anonymous Coward]

Where does the value of the dollar come from? It stopped being back by gold with Roosevelt. It comes from trust that it will be worth something when you go to spend it. That said, I barely trust the value of physical US bills; I am certainly not going to trust a virtual currency put forth by the government of Venezuela based on the value of oil that they are going to drill.

The executive orders are out of hand and out of line. There is supposed to be a separation of function within the branches of government. I just wonder how long before we see an executive "emergency" order where a president (please not Trump) authorizes themselves as dictator for life... LEGALLY.

Re:Debt

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.businessinsider.com/bitcoin-price-8-surprising-places-where-you-can-use-2017-10

Re:Debt

[angel'o'sphere]

Why would it be debt if you store one barrel of oil for each coin?

I just don't see how bitcoin is even maintaining it's current price because if you can't buy anything with it then what use is it?
Hae? That is a silly statement/question. You can nearly buy everything you want with bitcoin.

Re:Debt

[LynnwoodRooster]

That is a silly statement/question. You can nearly buy everything you want with bitcoin.

Really? I'm going to dinner tomorrow night at Mastro's Ocean Club. Can I pay for it with Bitcoin? How about my trip this coming weekend to Singapore - I'll be staying at some nice hotels, going to a trade show, I can pay for that with Bitcoin?

Re:Debt

[Anonymous Coward]

Negative. Not one single restaurant, gas station, or any store I've been in accepts them. Cash or credit card only.

Re:Debt

[ancientt]

It comes from trust that it will be worth something when you go to spend it.

You can spend it on taxes. That's the real value. Sure the government backs it up with guns and tanks and such, but they only have so much ability to make people agree on how much goods and services are worth.

OTOH cryptocurrencies have exactly zero validity unless people agree to place value on them. I'm not sure which I trust more, governments or people.

Re:Debt

[ancientt]

Yes. They take VISA, aka you can spend Bitcoin there.

I got a card from Coinbase. Anywhere I can use a VISA, I can spend my cryptocurrency. My card by itself would be accepted most places in Singapore, and I could withdraw local currency as needed.

As for me personally? I actually couldn't pay for it with Bitcoin because I liquidated all my Bitcoin at a value maybe ten percent below it's current value, but I could pay for stuff with Bitcoin Cash ... not that what I have left would go very far.

I invested in Mt. Gox when it was still going strong, and lost all my investments in it when it crashed. I lost nearly seven dollars! I was mailed information about joining a class action lawsuit, but my cynicism in investing along with my laziness kept me from pursuing any compensation.

That's why I switched to Coinbase actually. I figured that I'd spend a fraction of my entertainment money playing in that system and trusted them more since they're governed by US law. As soon as I had the option to put my "investment" in an offline system, I went for it. When mainstream news started to talk about Bitcoin, I cashed out. I did well. $50,000 less than I would have made if I'd had two different decisions, but hey, when it's a two thousand percent gain or a near total loss, I feel like that was a good call. Honestly I wish I hadn't paid any attention at all and just stuck with the HODL approach, but as soon as my "investments" were worth more than dinner and a movie, I didn't have the risk tolerance real gamblers do.

That's my real takeaway from my experience. If you're lucky, and don't mind gambling real money, you can have a lot of fun with cryptocurrency. If you're not really a gambler (like me) then it's entertainment. If you're a real gambler... well you might make inconceivable fortunes if you're lucky, but you have to be willing to lose actual significant money and that's hard for me to empathize with.

Re:Debt

[angel'o'sphere]

Are you an idiot or what?

Obviously you can spent your bitcoins only at places that accept bitcoin ...

Why waste your time to make such a retarded post?

Re:Debt

[LynnwoodRooster]

So it never converts to US dollars? Really? I'm surprised at that...

Re:Debt

[LynnwoodRooster]

You can nearly buy everything you want with bitcoin.

You stated it. And yes, it was a retarded post. I have no idea why you claimed what you did...

Re:Debt

[angel'o'sphere]

Why don't you google for goods and services that accept bitcoin?
Hu?

Instead of playing stupid ...

Venezuela bans Trump

[Anonymous Coward]

Cryptocurrency was designed for freedom for everyone, including people you disagree with. It's like the first and second amendment but for money.

Trump hates anybody!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Maduro tries to make Venezuela Great First and Again!

Mexico could or not could pay the Walls in BitCoins!!!.

Good luck winning that in court...

[Anonymous Coward]

'Nuf Said

Why give bucks

[DCFusor]

To a government who calls you Satan? OK. BuhBye.

Re:Why give bucks

[ancientt]

Really?

I've had plenty of paychecks signed by people who probably had abandoned any traces of morality. I've been on phone calls with customers who hated me and any concept I might have been associated with, but whose business supported my paycheck.

You're telling me that investing in a cryptocurrency might support some government I don't like? I couldn't care less. It might go against some hairy muppet in office? I actually could care less... if it goes against that moron's desires, it moves my give-a-damn-a-meter slightly towards inclined. Not enough to do anything significant, but enough to post on slashdot.

Here's the chance for you anti-Trump people to jump on a bandwagon. If you really want to make a statement, you need to invest in whatever he's against. Just give me a minute to click a couple buttons first.. okay, now.

Just kidding, I don't expect any rational response. I don't even trust the public to have a completely irrational response at this point.

The Tragedy of Venezuela

[Anonymous Coward]

Sargon does a good job of explaining the current status of Venezuela. If you're smart you won't buy their crypto.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNjtpksJD4s&t=386s

Cryptocurrency market reaction

[JaredOfEuropa]

Bitcoin prices dropped about $200 to around $8,388, according to Coinbase, following the order.

Bitcoin prices fell way more than that the day before, because someone farted in a trading room I assume. And now they are going back up. This stuff's really volatile, a $200 price change is just noise.

Re:Cryptocurrency market reaction

[Anonymous Coward]

Who think the president himself is not getting in on it? He can just barely threaten to ban Bitcoin, get in on the low prices, then the next day say: "Actually, Bitcoin is encouraged in the USA!"

Re:Cryptocurrency market reaction

[Drethon]

Just like news articles often post the stock market has dropped 400 points for reason x, and by the time the article is posted the market is up 200 points. Most movement in financial markets have a lot more factors than news articles usually account for.

Re:Cryptocurrency market reaction

[Anonymous Coward]

Petro runs on the ethereum platform and has nothing to do with bitcoin.

Cryptocurrency finally becomes a self-parody

[The voice of Reason.]

A project that sprang from a motivation to eliminate the ability for central bankers to arbitrarily print money (by transferring the function of money creation to "the people") becomes the very tool used to facilitate it. Shockingly, It turns out that governments are members of the set called "the people." /s

Re:Cryptocurrency finally becomes a self-parody

[Anonymous Coward]

A project that sprang from a motivation to eliminate the ability for central bankers to arbitrarily print money (by transferring the function of money creation to "the people") becomes the very tool used to facilitate it. Shockingly, It turns out that governments are members of the set called "the people." /s

The Government of Venezuela isn't able to print bitcoin. The technology is still working as intended in this regard.

You could argue that the petro also cannot be arbitrarily printed because each token is backed with a barrel of oil. However, history suggests that governments are not capable of maintaining currency backings long term; the incentive to cheat is simply too great.

Congress made that law

[williamyf]

A long while ago, the USoA congress made a law that allowed the executive branch to take special meassures and granted it special powers in case a country was a "threat to USoA security".

Lord Obama declared Venezuela an "unnusual threat", and even renewed the declaration one year latter, just before Lord Trump's Inauguration.

Lord Trump renewed it once more.

But, what lord trump is telling you is to use your money as you see fit EXCEPT in aiding threats to national security. Just as you are supposed NOT to spend your money on goods sold by ISIS, you are not supposed to buy Venezuelan bonds, including the petro.

But is as well, the petro is a giant scam, in this particular case, Lord Trump is doing you a favour.

Re:Congress made that law

[PrimaryConsult]

Just as you are supposed NOT to spend your money on goods sold by ISIS, you are not supposed to buy Venezuelan bonds, including the petro.

In that case I wonder why Citgo is still allowed to operate in the US. Oh yeah, because entrenched interests like it that way. Funny how calls of "national security" don't apply when influential people with large amounts of money stand to lose it...

Re:Congress made that law

[jwhyche]

Funny how calls of "national security"

National security is a nice catch all phrase that they use when they want to do a end run around the law and strip you of your rights. Unless its about guns, then its "think of the children."

Re:Congress made that law

[sysrammer]

These Lords you speak of...are they aristocratic like the House of Lords? Or tyrannical like the Sith Lords?

Re:Congress made that law

[dwye]

Most Citgo stations are privately owned, by Americans or legal American residents. Venezuela sold the vast majority years ago, probably in anticipating something like this order or its predecessors. Where they get their gas, now, I do not know, but it shouldn't be hard to find some from US refineries.

Any still owned by Venezuela would have been shut down during President Obama's term, by his executive orders.

Sorry, nothing to see here.

Re:Congress made that law

[jwhyche]

Or tyrannical like the Sith Lords?

Sometimes I would rather deal with Sith Lords. At least they are honest about their goals.

Re:Congress made that law

[Anonymous Coward]

[quote] Unless its about guns, then its "think of the children."[/quote]

The shooters seem to be "thinking of the children" enough

pssht! get with the 21st century gradpa!

[Anonymous Coward]

In Korea, only old people use oil.


Our mecha all run on atomic isomer batteries and shoot unicorn farts

Re: pssht! get with the 21st century gradpa!

[Type44Q]

South Korean Powered Armor... powered by North Koreans? (They're rather small, after all.)

you americans

[Anonymous Coward]

fucked up so bad with that idiot.
laughing stock of the world.
Used to be the n.korean guy that came with stupid things but now he got a friend

Poll: Is there any wisdom behind this POTUS?

[no-body]

If negative, why not just ignore what happens?

His Ego lives on attention, the more, the bigger.

If ignored, self-implosion may be imminent....

Just watch the show.

Can someone explain to me why we have sactions

[rsilvergun]

on Venezuela while we help the Saudi's bomb Yemen? I get that they're government is sketchy, but we support something like 80% of the world's dictatorships. If we're trying to take the high ground on Democracy that boat has sailed, circumnavigated the globe and returned laden with exotic spice (joke shamelessly stolen from Yatzee of Zero Punctuation fame)

Re:Can someone explain to me why we have sactions

[Anonymous Coward]

Because to Trumps' supporters anything he does is great.

Re:Can someone explain to me why we have sactions

[Anonymous Coward]

can ban transactions, can't ban mining!!!

Re:Can someone explain to me why we have sactions

[losfromla]

Because there is a large military base and the bombs used to bomb Yemeni's from the stone age back into the stone age are 'murikan bombs, thus profit! We have a whole city there to support the bombing and that's all, profit! That is one reason we gleefully endorse the atrocities inflicted on an impoverished peoples by their very oil-wealthy neighbors. Oil!

Re:Can someone explain to me why we have sactions

[Anonymous Coward]

Bomb Yemeni puppets of the Iranian regime that's been exporting terror across the world for longer than you've been alive. Yeah, you're wrong. The Saudis are wrong, but you've fallen for some terribly blatant propaganda.

Re:Can someone explain to me why we have sactions

[Anonymous Coward]

Interests. Venezuela was a former ally that elected a socialist and started criticizing US imperialism. If Venezuela was allowed to take that stance AND their economy continued to grow it could threaten what's left of the shaky neoliberal consensus in the region. They need to be made example of.

Shithole countries don't just happen by themselves you know.

Re:Can someone explain to me why we have sactions

[dwye]

We support bombing Shiite Yemeni, and when Sunni Yemeni get hit that is the unfortunate effects of war. If Iran had not paid the Shiites to try to take over Yemen, it would still warrant its Roman name of Arabica Felix (I think that is how they spelled it -- Happy Arabia, not Arabian Cat).

Re:Can someone explain to me why we have sactions

[Anonymous Coward]

The sanctions are very specific: they apply only to the Petro "currency", which is not even currency because us Venezuelans here cannot even buy it. Nothing will change here for the average person because people deal in VEB (food, small stuff) and in USD (cars, apartments and whatever costs a bit of money). The Petro is something they made up to try to avoid sanctions.

Re:Can someone explain to me why we have sactions

[losfromla]

Why is it ok to bomb Shiite Yemeni and not Sunni Yemeni? Are they not all humans who should be free to live their lives?

I find weird the lack of consistency too being that Osama Bin Laden was a Sunni Muslim and he was our enemy... What is that about? Do we hate both Sunni's and Shiites or does that vary by region? Also, why the big hard on for Iran? We destabilized their nation by installing a puppet ruler and now we're mad that they're trying to get their shit together? Nation-building is hard work, who'd have thought? Were our previous presidents as stupid as dt, just not so public about it?

Re:Can someone explain to me why we have sactions

[Uberbah]

Because to Trumps' supporters anything he does is great.

No change from his predecessor's sycophants. Obama was a particularly brazen liar, but it really took the cake when he said Venezuela was a threat to the United States to justify sanctioning the country. As for Yemen, Trump is just continuing where Obama left off.

Sign me up! Trump makes me want this shitcoin

[Anonymous Coward]

I've never had any interest in Venezuela's ?crypto coin?. I'm not even really sure you can call it that, but in any event. The thing it really does is enable Venezulea's flawed socialist policies to survive and live another day. It's really just a means of getting around the unconscionable embargoes.

Pressing Issues.

[Anonymous Coward]

Childrens lives threatened by gun violence..
Foreign manipulation of elections..
Healthcare..

NOPE... it's Venezuela!

LOLWUT!?!

Re: The "Real" World

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean the one where one in four Americans is on the Internet constantly and faces total job loss in ten years?

Yeah! Schoolin' dem retards will fix dat!

Remember

[MrKaos]

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. - Gandhi

Re:Remember

[dwye]

Ask Adolf or Benny the Moose how that worked out for them.

Or ask any Indians, either Hindu or Islamic, how Partition worked out.

Re:Remember

[MrKaos]

Relax, it's an observation.

Beating sick horses

[Tablizer]

Venezuela has enough problems already: leave them alone. The world is full of dictators, why focus on them?

No.

[Anonymous Coward]

The sanctions obama put on venezuela banned their crypto currency.

Trump is just pointing it out again because everyone is fucking stupid and think 'internet' makes this different somehow and the rules don't apply.

What a waste of time

[Anonymous Coward]

Why is he trying to double the amount of EO's Obama wrote

Ahh America

[Anonymous Coward]

Still catching up to the Chinese crypto bans. Is there nothing you won't copy from them?

Venezuela is doing things right, thus the ban

[Anonymous Coward]

Venezuela is doing a number of things right. The cryptocurrency is one of them. Of course, the real reason why Trump dislikes Venezuela is the fact that several years ago, they enacted a countrywide gun ban on civilian ownership of firearms and ammo. Violent crime has gone down to 1/1000 of the levels before the ban was passed.

Of course, they are being punished for this. Wonder why? No wonder why the NRA is equal to the KKK with the protest chants these days.

Re: Venezuela is doing things right, thus the ban

[Anonymous Coward]

What the actual fuck?
Venezuelan here. Not gonna explain anything, too busy being exiled from the shit hole Venezuela turned out to be.

Just passing through to say GO TO FUCKING HELL COMMIE BASTARD

No news

[NewYork]

Till China bans Venezuela's Cryptocurrency