Dylan Ratigan Audit Exposes Secrets ~ Corruption of Federal Reserve #OpESR #EndTheFed #a99 #AntiShock #OpPulse #ch34 #OWS #GlobalRevolution
Dylan Ratigan Audit Exposes Secrets ~ Corruption of Federal Reserve #OpESR #EndTheFed #a99 #AntiShock #OpPulse #ch34 #OWS #GlobalRevolution
#Anonymous - Fed Reserve Caught Red Handed
#Anon #NewZ(http://www.youtube.com/user/TheAnonymouse01) Bankers Jumping Ship as Corrupt Banking at the Highest Levels Exposed
I want to thank a good friend for an article she sent over that led me on this rabbit trail. Jill Thanks! It will boggle the minds of most of you but everyone should see it and make themselves read and understand it.
I am going to go over this piece that will leave one with a greater understanding of why so many CEO’s of banks or financial institutions are resigning. This is but one story of who knows how many that are or have gone on out there either in the past or currently. Most importantly we have to ask — where is all the money going?
This will not be a short piece but I assure you I will make it fun and very easy to understand. It is a true labyrinth in the creation of monetary instruments and shenanigans that the elite go through to make it and use it. While you may not think this is important or that you can do anything about it, understand that just us understanding what they are doing exposes the corruption and that alone will cause the end game. Soo with out further ado, I will start.
I would like you all to watch this 11 minute video. It is a man in parliment in London bringing the scheme to the attention of the chamber and asking for a delegation to be set up to look into it. It appears that 15 Trillion is in a void of non compliance and England or two of its banks are on the hook for it. He is genuinly concerned — He is the whistleblower if you will. Here is the piece but please watch the chamber fill until it starts (about two minutes) and then fast forward the thing to 17:20 where Lord Blackheath speaks and notice the attendance then and listen then for the next 11 minutes. This is important but I will talk about attendance later. I am going to ask you to read the transcript of this after you watch it. If you have the ability of two screens, you can watch and read the transcript below at the same time.
I would like you take the time to read the transcript now of that same speech verbatim. There is not trickery here but the more you digest the facts, the more it will come together. When you are done reading this, I will then go over it with my edits or notes and it will all come home.
group suspects Obama White House of working with these lobbyists to defend genetically engineered (GE) crops and the attempts get these GE crops planted in wildlife refuges across the United States Part of the information which is currently being withheld by the Obama administration is part of an email from January 2011 from a lobbyist to a top White House policy analyst This lobbyist was with the Biotechnology Industry Organization, or BIO, which regularly represents the interests of companies specializing in GE seeds like Syngenta and the infamous multinational giant Monsanto.
revolution inflation ron paul obama zeitgeist disaster riots protests jobs alex jones prison planet info wars nature fukushima default debt stock market crash peter schiff max keiser rt oath keepers tsarion Occupy Wall Street End the Fed alan watts truth movement we are the 99% we are change anonymous marine soldier occupy marines a new alliance Tear Gas OWS zuccotti park TSA oakland
FAIR USE NOTICE: This video may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes only. This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 106A-117 of the US Copyright Law.
WASHINGTON, Oct. 19 - A new audit of the Federal Reserve released today detailed widespread conflicts of interest involving directors of its regional banks.
"The most powerful entity in the United States is riddled with conflicts of interest," Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said after reviewing the Government Accountability Office report. The study required by a Sanders Amendment to last year’s Wall Street reform law examined Fed practices never before subjected to such independent, expert scrutiny.
The GAO detailed instance after instance of top executives of corporations and financial institutions using their influence as Federal Reserve directors to financially benefit their firms, and, in at least one instance, themselves. “Clearly it is unacceptable for so few people to wield so much unchecked power,” Sanders said. “Not only do they run the banks, they run the institutions that regulate the banks.”
Sanders said he will work with leading economists to develop legislation to restructure the Fed and bar the banking industry from picking Fed directors. “This is exactly the kind of outrageous behavior by the big banks and Wall Street that is infuriating so many Americans,” Sanders said.
The corporate affiliations of Fed directors from such banking and industry giants as General Electric, JP Morgan Chase, and Lehman Brothers pose “reputational risks” to the Federal Reserve System, the report said. Giving the banking industry the power to both elect and serve as Fed directors creates “an appearance of a conflict of interest,” the report added.
The 108-page report found that at least 18 specific current and former Fed board members were affiliated with banks and companies that received emergency loans from the Federal Reserve during the financial crisis.
In the dry and understated language of auditors, the report noted that there are no restrictions in Fed rules on directors communicating concerns about their respective banks to the staff of the Federal Reserve. It also said many directors own stock or work directly for banks that are supervised and regulated by the Federal Reserve. The rules, which the Fed has kept secret, let directors tied to banks participate in decisions involving how much interest to charge financial institutions and how much credit to provide healthy banks and institutions in “hazardous” condition. Even when situations arise that run afoul of Fed’s conflict rules and waivers are granted, the GAO said the waivers are kept hidden from the public.
The report by the non-partisan research arm of Congress did not name but unambiguously described several individual cases involving Fed directors that created the appearance of a conflict of interest, including:
* Stephen Friedman In 2008, the New York Fed approved an application from Goldman Sachs to become a bank holding company giving it access to cheap Fed loans. During the same period, Friedman, chairman of the New York Fed, sat on the Goldman Sachs board of directors and owned Goldman stock, something the Fed’s rules prohibited. He received a waiver in late 2008 that was not made public. After Friedman received the waiver, he continued to purchase stock in Goldman from November 2008 through January of 2009 unbeknownst to the Fed, according to the GAO.
* Jeffrey Immelt The Federal Reserve Bank of New York consulted with General Electric on the creation of the Commercial Paper Funding Facility. The Fed later provided $16 billion in financing for GE under the emergency lending program while Immelt, GE’s CEO, served as a director on the board of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
* Jamie Dimon The CEO of JP Morgan Chase served on the board of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York at the same time that his bank received emergency loans from the Fed and was used by the Fed as a clearing bank for the Fed’s emergency lending programs. In 2008, the Fed provided JP Morgan Chase with $29 billion in financing to acquire Bear Stearns.At the time, Dimon persuaded the Fed to provide JP Morgan Chase with an 18-month exemption from risk-based leverage and capital requirements. He also convinced the Fed to take risky mortgage-related assets off of Bear Stearns balance sheet before JP Morgan Chase acquired this troubled investment bank.
The Fed - Out of Control - End the FEDERAL RESERVE. Audit the FED #ENDTHEFED #OCCUPYTHEFED
The Federal Reserve is one of the most powerful and secretive institutions in Washington, long considered beyond the reach of lawmakers. But now, as details emerge of how the Fed secretly doled out more than a trillion dollars during the financial crisis, a rare bipartisan movement in Congress demands that the Fed be held accountable.
Before the US House of Representatives, February 4, 2009, introducing the The Federal Reserve Board Abolition Act, H.R. 833.
Madame Speaker, I rise to introduce legislation to restore financial stability to America’s economy by abolishing the Federal Reserve. Since the creation of the Federal Reserve, middle and working-class Americans have been victimized by a boom-and-bust monetary policy. In addition, most Americans have suffered a steadily eroding purchasing power because of the Federal Reserve’s inflationary policies. This represents a real, if hidden, tax imposed on the American people.
From the Great Depression, to the stagflation of the seventies, to the current economic crisis caused by the housing bubble, every economic downturn suffered by this country over the past century can be traced to Federal Reserve policy. The Fed has followed a consistent policy of flooding the economy with easy money, leading to a misallocation of resources and an artificial “boom” followed by a recession or depression when the Fed-created bubble bursts.
With a stable currency, American exporters will no longer be held hostage to an erratic monetary policy. Stabilizing the currency will also give Americans new incentives to save as they will no longer have to fear inflation eroding their savings. Those members concerned about increasing America’s exports or the low rate of savings should be enthusiastic supporters of this legislation.
Though the Federal Reserve policy harms the average American, it benefits those in a position to take advantage of the cycles in monetary policy. The main beneficiaries are those who receive access to artificially inflated money and/or credit before the inflationary effects of the policy impact the entire economy. Federal Reserve policies also benefit big spending politicians who use the inflated currency created by the Fed to hide the true costs of the welfare-warfare state. It is time for Congress to put the interests of the American people ahead of special interests and their own appetite for big government.
Abolishing the Federal Reserve will allow Congress to reassert its constitutional authority over monetary policy. The United States Constitution grants to Congress the authority to coin money and regulate the value of the currency. The Constitution does not give Congress the authority to delegate control over monetary policy to a central bank. Furthermore, the Constitution certainly does not empower the federal government to erode the American standard of living via an inflationary monetary policy.
In fact, Congress’ constitutional mandate regarding monetary policy should only permit currency backed by stable commodities such as silver and gold to be used as legal tender. Therefore, abolishing the Federal Reserve and returning to a constitutional system will enable America to return to the type of monetary system envisioned by our nation’s founders: one where the value of money is consistent because it is tied to a commodity such as gold. Such a monetary system is the basis of a true free-market economy.
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to stand up for working Americans by putting an end to the manipulation of the money supply which erodes Americans’ standard of living, enlarges big government, and enriches well-connected elites, by cosponsoring my legislation to abolish the Federal Reserve.
No one expects the Fed to announce a rate-hike at the end of the today’s FOMC meeting, but that doesn’t mean there won’t be a few surprises. The problem is that the recovery has stalled and the Fed can’t decide whether we’ve just hit a “soft patch” or if it’s something more serious. If it is more serious, then the Fed will need a contingency plan for kick-starting the economy. So, what’s it going to be; another round of Quantitative Easing (QE), rate caps on short-term Treasuries or something else altogether? That’s what the financial media will want to know, and only Fed chairman Ben Bernanke knows the answers.
But before we get to that, let’s look at the economy. First quarter growth has been revised to an anemic 1.8 percent and economists are currently shaving their estimates for Q2. Some think that the high number of “black swan” events (Tsunami in Japan, debt problems in the eurozone) are mainly responsible for the poor growth, but that doesn’t explain the sharp downturn in hiring, manufacturing, housing and consumer confidence. The US is experiencing a dropoff in demand at the worst possible time, just as Obama’s $800 billion fiscal stimulus and Bernanke’s $600 billion monetary stimulus are running out of gas. That means even less support for an economy that can barley stand upright as it is. Here’s an excerpt from an article by Nouriel Roubini with a rundown on the economy:
"…there are good reasons to believe that we are experiencing a more persistent slump…. the factors slowing US growth are chronic. These include slow but persistent private and public-sector deleveraging; rising oil prices; weak job creation; another downturn in the housing market; severe fiscal problems at the state and local level; and an unsustainable deficit and debt burden at the federal level….
If what is happening now turns out to be something worse than a temporary soft patch, the market correction will continue further, thus weakening growth as the negative wealth effects of falling equity markets reduce private spending.” (“That Stalling Feeling”, Nouriel roubini, Project Syndicate)
More and more mainstream economists have joined Roubini in thinking that recent sluggishness is more than a soft patch. They think we may be headed for a double dip recession. Surprisingly, former chief economic advisor to the president, Lawrence Summers, has joined the Cassandras and is warning of stiffer headwinds just ahead. Here’s a clip from Summers recent op-ed in the Financial Times:
"…the US is now half way to a lost economic decade…..the problem in a period of high unemployment, as now, is a lack of business demand for employees not any lack of desire to work is all but self-evident… When demand is constraining an economy, there is little to be gained from increasing potential supply. …
What, then, is to be done? This is no time for … traditional political agendas.
… The fiscal debate must accept that the greatest threat to our creditworthiness is a sustained period of slow growth. Discussions about medium-term austerity need to be coupled with a focus on near-term growth….
Substantial withdrawal of fiscal stimulus at the end of 2011 would be premature. Stimulus should be continued and indeed expanded by providing the payroll tax cut to employers as well as employees…
We averted Depression in 2008/2009 by acting decisively. Now we can avert a lost decade by recognizing economic reality.” (“How to avoid stumbling into our own lost decade”, Lawrence Summers, Financial Times)
Consider the irony of Summers—who designed Obama’s $800 billion stimulus package and rejected the warnings of other prominent economists who said the stimulus was “too small”—recanting in the FT and pleading for a second round. Pretty shameless, eh? But the point is the leading economic indicators are pointed down, hiring has slowed to a crawl, household spending and personal consumption have tapered off, wages remain flat, and lending is barley staying even. In other words, the Fed’s efforts to stimulate demand have failed. The economy is in another funk.
So, what is Bernanke going to say at today’s meeting?
Ahhh, that’s where the surprise comes in, but there was a clue in an article last week on Bloomberg News. Here’s an excerpt from the article:
"Federal Reserve officials are discussing whether to adopt an explicit target for inflation, a strategy long advocated by Chairman Ben S. Bernanke …. An inflation target could help quiet critics of record monetary stimulus and anchor public expectations for consumer prices should the Fed in coming months try to spur the recovery by keeping interest rates close to zero for longer.
“My sense is that this may be a done deal, though not one likely to be implemented soon, and perhaps not until economic conditions return to closer to normal,” said Laurence Meyer, senior managing director and co-founder of Macroeconomic Advisers LLC and a former Fed governor.
“The chairman is obviously for it, and it is hard to find anybody on the FOMC who now is really opposed to it.” (“Fed Officials Said to Discuss Adopting Inflation Target Backed by Bernanke”, Bloomberg)
So, an inflation target is a “done deal”? Really? But what does that mean?
Once the Fed sets an “explicit inflation target”, then (if the CPI is below the target and rates are already at zero, as they are today) the Fed can buy as many bonds as they please until their goal is reached. If that sounds a lot like Quantitative Easing; it’s because it’s the same thing. (Although this time it will probably involve rate caps on medium-term Treasuries) Is that what Bernanke is doing; announcing a third round of his controversial bond purchasing program without using the same name?
It sure looks like it. In fact, any mention today of “inflation targeting” at today’s FOMC meeting should be taken as a sign that Bernanke is planning another bond buying binge, despite the fact that the only people who really benefited from the program have been investors who’ve seen stock prices skyrocket from the money that’s shifted out of bonds into equities. All the gains from QE2 went to Wall Street.
As for inflation targeting, Bernanke is not just an advocate of the policy, he’s its biggest booster. He’s even written a book on the topic titled “Inflation Targeting: Lessons from the International Experience” with co-authors Thomas Laubach, Frederic S. Mishkin, and Adam S. Posen in 2001. There’s every reason to suspect that the neoliberal credo that Bernanke espouses in his book helped shoehorn him into the top-spot at the Central Bank. It certainly had nothing to do with his abyssal track record.
So, what’s so bad about an explicit inflation target anyway? Haven’t other countries used the policy effectively?
Yes, they have. But other countries (particularly in the EU) also have labor laws and a social safety net which tend to protect workers from the abuses of errant monetary policy. Not so in the US. If Bernanke executes his plan, high unemployment and slow growth will become a permanent feature of life in America. Here’s an excerpt from an article by Nobel prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz mulling over the effects of inflation targeting in other countries:
"Today, inflation targeting is being put to the test — and it will almost certainly fail. Developing countries currently face higher rates of inflation, not because of poorer macro-management, but because oil and food prices are soaring, and these items represent a much larger share of the average household budget than in rich countries….Inflation in these countries is, for the most part, imported. Raising interest rates won’t have much effect on the international price of grains or fuel…" ("What’s wrong with inflation targeting?", Joseph Stiglitz, Project Syndicate)
But Stiglitz is talking about “developing countries”. Does that same rule apply to the US?
Yes, it does. If the Fed achieves its target rate, then Bernanke will raise short-term rates regardless of the effects on growth or employment. That’s what inflation targeting is all about; it’s a hat-tip to investors that the Fed will preserve their wealth at all costs, even if the broader economy has to be sacrificed. Here’s a clip from an article by economist Dean Baker who draws the same conclusion as Stiglitz:
"Inflation targeting has led to an enormous economic and human disaster, likely costing the world more than $10tn in lost output and leaving tens of millions of people unemployed. If this experience is not enough to discredit a policy, it is difficult to imagine any possible set of events in the world that could lead the inflation targeters to change their minds….
….the central bankers and others directing policy place the interests of the financial sector at the center of their concerns.” (“Guess which policy your central bank will pursue”, Dean Baker, Guardian)
Get the picture? Inflation targeting is neoliberalism writ large, no different than “structural adjustment”, “debt consolidation”, “privatization of public assets” etc. It’s another subsidy for speculators while ordinary working people get kicked to the curb.
Here’s one last blurb from economist James Galbraith who’s even more skeptical of inflation targeting than Stiglitz or Baker. This excerpt is from Galbraith’s blistering critique of Bernanke’s book titled “The Inflation Obsession: Flying in the Face of the Facts”:
"….Inflation targeting in all cases coincided with high unemployment, and its main effect was to excuse central bankers from addressing this crisis…..("The Inflation Obsession: Flying in the Face of the Facts", James k. Galbraith, Foreign Affairs)
That’s it in a nutshell. Bernanke wants to absolve himself of any responsibility to enact policies that will create “full employment”. He’d rather shrug off the Fed’s dual mandate (“price stability and full employment”) and focus on inflation alone. That means that soaring unemployment and slow growth will be the norm for years to come.
There’s a reason why Stiglitz, Baker and Galbraith all oppose inflation targeting. It’s bad policy.
Mike Whitney is a frequent contributor to Global Research. Global Research Articles by Mike Whitney
WHAT: THE SIEGE OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE
WHEN: MARCH 28+
WHERE: 12 DISTRICT FED BANKS PLUS BOARD OF GOVERNORS IN DC
These protests are in solidarity with our brothers and sisters in the UK and all those fighting for their economic and physical freedom in the world. The United States is need of a vocal and physical front; a demonstration that is too broad will fall short. Target the Federal Reserve. Organize protests at the 12 Federal Reserve banks. Our goal is to picket the Fed so that there is no movement into the building, and thus to paralyze their operations. We are under siege by the banks and their cohorts; we are entrapped in moats of debt, and they have turned our government against us. Democracy and liberty erode in the face of their assault. Thus it seems that there is no way to break the insidious monster that slowly strangles our economy, throwing millions into poverty and desperation. Class and money are irrelevant in the eyes of eternity. Stand up for your brothers and sisters who have no voice. Stand up for those who are being silenced. On March 28 we will place the great instrument of those who assault liberty, the Federal Reserve, under siege. We will not back down, and the longer we hold out, the more our ranks will swell, and the more effective we will become. Additionally, Arab leaders empowered by US dollars and equipment continue to abuse human rights and fight against the tide of change. The people of the United States cannot allow this transgression against liberty and democracy to endure. The silence of our government amounts to condoning tyranny and despots. The government does not speak for the people, and thus on March 28 we will make our voice heard. You are inspired, now be the inspiration.
Besiege these institutions in the hopes that:
The Fed Surrenders its Private Status
Quantitative Easing Is Ended
Assumes and Forgives the Debt of Homeowners in Danger of Foreclosure
Surrenders Control of the Monetary Supply
The United States Government supports with all its might revolutionaries in:
and where ever else the cries of freedom are met with the fists of tyranny
Gather all the support you can. Reach out to friends. Spread the word. Are you Federally Disturbed by the Federal Reserve?
The Goal: multi-day protest beginning on March 28 (6 AM) that will annoy the hell out of the Federal Reserve
The Means: Place the 12 banks under siege. Allow everybody in however. Peaceful disobedience. Shenanigans. Tomfoolery. Nothing illegal. BEGIN THE SIEGE ON MONDAY MARCH 28. STRENGTH IN NUMBERS.
Locations (courtesy of the Federal Reserve): http://www.federalreserve.gov/fraddress.htm
Demonstrations will take place at each of the 12 district banks and the Board of Governors in Washington, DC:
District 1: Boston: 600 Atlantic Avenue
District 2: New York: 33 Liberty Street
District 3: Philadelphia: Ten Independence Mall
District 4: Cleveland: 1455 East Sixth Street
District 5: Richmond, VA: 701 East Byrd Street
District 6: Atlanta: 1000 Peachtree Street NE
Distrcit 7: Chicago: 230 South LaSalle Street
District 8: St Louis: One Federal Reserve Bank Plaza
Broadway and Locust Streets
District 9: Minneapolis:90 Hennepin Avenue
District 10: Kansas City, MO: 1 Memorial Drive
District 11: Dallas: 2200 North Pearl Street
District 12: San Fransisco: 101 Market Street
Board of Governors:
20th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20551
Also: PLEASE PLACE THE BANK OF AMERICA HEADQUARTERS IN CHARLOTTE, NC UNDER SIEGE: THE ADDRESS IS 100 NORTH TYRON ST, CHARLOTTE, NC
If these locations are inaccessible to you, please look here for fed branches that may be closer: http://www.federalreserve.gov/branches.htm Branch locations: Cincy, Pittsburg, Baltimore, Charlotte, Birmingham, Jacksonville, Miami, Nashville, New Orleans, Detroit, Little Rock, Louisville, Memphis, Helena, Denver, Oklahoma City, Omaha, El Paso, Houston, San Antonio, LA, Portland ORE, Salt Lake City, Seattle
SPREAD THIS MESSAGE
freedoms domestically and internationally. Hooray beer!
some fun facts: http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/11-reasons-why-the-federal-reserve-is-bad
FRB: Addresses and Phone Numbers of Federal Reserve Board and FR Banks
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System 20th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20551FRB: Addresses and Phone Numbers of Federal Reserve Board and FR Banks www.federalreserve.govBoard of Governors of the Federal Reserve System 20th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20551