On Patribotics, Mensch's blog, today: That odd tweet of Spicers? A bit coin code--not a password.

[pnwmom]

https://patribotics.blog/2017/05/01/exclusive-sean-spicer-tweeted-a-bitcoin-address-not-his-password/

On January 26th of 2017 Sean Spicer using his verified twitter account tweeted the string “n9y25ah7”

Now, around this time so called tech experts in the mainstream press assumed multiple things:

That this tweet was accidental.
That this was either some kind of quickly changed twitter password, or just a random string of letters.
But none are true. It wasn’t a password.

SNIP

[mainer]

1. What the heck is this all about?

Where did that $22,000 come from?

[SticksnStones]

16. And who was he sending it to?

[tanyev]

2. Ooh, interesting.

[Achilleaze]

3. I haz deciphered the code

Spice Boy was sending out republican gloattage code, which when translated to English means:

"Ha ha America. We repukes & our russian BFFs have totally suckered you honest citizens. We haz illegitimately installed our a-hole republican Draft-Dodger-in-Chief, and now we are going to clean your taxpaying wallets as we continue to lie and cheat with republican impunity. Ha Ha, stupid suckers."

[GeorgeGist]

4. Test transaction?

The address that received the bitcoin to also gained 3 more payments on march 3rd, very large payments. Over $22,000 dollars worth.

[pnwmom]

5. That's the speculation on Louise Mensch's Twitter account. n/t

[Nwgirl503]

6. Interesting that WH employees use crypto currency

Maybe it's gotten a lot more widespread in the last couple years, but when I first got into it, it was used mainly as a means to avoid detection and for nefarious transactions. IDK why but this pings my conspiracy theory button. I'm probably way off base tho.

[pnwmom]

7. The club of suspicious people who are probably "way off base" is getting larger and larger.

Yes, bitcoin's special value is in untraceable transactions. (Or that used to be the case, anyway.)

[octoberlib]

8. Mensch's blog is fascinating reading. And it all makes sense.

[groundloop]

9. "Untraceable transactions"..... as in paying Russian hackers maybe

[Achilleaze]

10. OK, now we have to change Spicer's nickname, maybe to Bitcoin Buyoff Boy-0

republican "family values" totally suck the dregs of the cosmic cesspool.
I'm just sayin...

[melman]

15. Bitcoin is not untraceable

[pnwmom]

17. You're right -- it is no longer untraceable. But many of the users still think it is.

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/03/why-criminals-cant-hide-behind-bitcoin

Bitcoin, the Internet currency beloved by computer scientists, libertarians, and criminals, is no longer invulnerable. As recently as 3 years ago, it seemed that anyone could buy or sell anything with Bitcoin and never be tracked, let alone busted if they broke the law. “It’s totally anonymous,” was how one commenter put it in Bitcoin's forums in June 2013. “The FBI does not have a prayer of a chance of finding out who is who.”

[ProudLib72]

11. What was the account he was sending to?

Now it's down to the bitcoin gatekeepers to give us transparency.

[pnwmom]

13. The whole point of bitcoin is to be untraceable, though I just learned

that the IRS has subpoenaed bit coin records in other cases.

[ProudLib72]

18. From my understanding of bitcoin

There are people holding ledgers on account activity.

I admit that I do not understand the full complexity of bitcoin transactions, but I do know that there are people out there who keep tabs on the accounts like a bank teller. I was kind of hoping that someone might know the extent of the details these "tellers" have access to.

[SticksnStones]

19. It's anonymous but traceable to account numbers

You just don't know who owns the Bitcoin wallet (account).

At least, that's my understanding.

Anonymous being not the same as untraceable..

[pnwmom]

20. Okay, that helps clarify. Thanks. n/t

[SticksnStones]

21. ..

[sharedvalues]

23. Possible for accounts to be foreign

And thus unsubpoenable as to owner.

Remember how Silk Road was claimed to have been brought down - good old fashioned online gumshoeing. The thousands of Bitcoin transactions were not claimed to be the source of info.

[Mr. Ected]

12. Are bitcoin transactions subject to subpoena?

Just asking for a friend.

[pnwmom]

14. Apparently it can be.

http://www.coindesk.com/coinbase-user-irs-bitcoin-subpoena/

[sharedvalues]

22. Be careful, may be nothing - time is off

The letters Spicer tweeted were put into the Bitcoin block chain about 12 hours after he tweeted them, I believe

So someone with a bad sense of humor could have seen Spicer's public tweet and done the Bitcoin transaction. Doesn't have to be related to Spicer. It's hard to see how a public tweet could be used for any sort of verification for Spicer, especially since the block chain is also public. But maybe I'm just not being imaginative enough.



(Maybe Spicer was trying to get an anonymous Bitcoin user to verify their account, proving they had control of it. If so I'm not clear why they used a random string that Spicer publicly tweeted. Seems like terrible tradecraft.)

[pnwmom]

24. Yeah, but there have been hundreds of "may be nothings" -- starting with the Steele dossier,

and that one that turned out to be "something."

So we'll see whether this turns out to have any significance or not.

[L. Coyote]

25. What is interesting is the crowd source intelligence gathering going down.

Link to tweet

[canetoad]

26. The low amount - $1.13

"What he was buying with the bitcoin is anyone’s guess at this point. The low amount of money involved makes it seem extra strange."

Recently I had reason to identify myself to someone I deal with online. Can't remember the circumstances, lost password or whatever, but the route taken to identify was a random small amount of money, in my case $1.23 debited against my CC or Paypal or something, then refunded almost straight away.

Could this be a test transaction for identification?

[pnwmom]

27. Post #4 here speculated the same thing. n/t