The Daily Bail

You are ON FIRE!!!!! Awesome stuff!! I am emailing all my friends to tell them to come and watch this!!

DB...What is the total for new unique daily hits? You HAVE to be growing like WILD FIRE!!!!!!!!

I hate that more and more people think we live in a Democracy. WE LIVE IN A REPUBLIC!

I pledge allegence to the flag of the united States of America and to the REPUBLIC for which it stands......

I love the info here at the DB, but I hate politicians who don't really understand the words they use sometimes.

The video is has a very professional feel to it. It is logical and short enough (anything over 10 min I think many people won't even start up). I like how Grayson and Kanjorski (sp?) who are Dems and featured, illustrating the bipartisan nature of the movement. I like how Coleman's refusal to tell us where $1 trillion went is laid out again for all to see (not nearly enough people have seen that, imo!!!). I like the egregious examples of the Fed's conflicts of interest, but wondered why the video makers did not explain who owns/runs the Fed. My only guess is that since this video is sure to heighten peoples' interest, when they do their own research and find out that info, the impact will be all the more shocking.

I sure hope these guys do more. Should be run on national tv, imho.

Nothing like an idea whose time has come. There will be some sort of audit. Probably so neutered as to be meaningless.

Neutering may be a good idea. Do we really want to know what that balance sheet looks like?

The Fed resists an audit by insisting they must remain independent of pressure. But if O and the Dems take control of the Fed as they propose then how would they explain why they still won't audit?

I loved this clip and agree was also very impressed with the production value. Kudos to the filmmakers. I also loved the William Greider soundbites. However, I can not endorse his book "Secrets of the Temple" referenced in it, because Greider endorses obfuscation in it and has only recently changed his tune to let's take a look at the rotting corpse of the wizard behind the curtain.

If you want the real story of America's banking system and the Fed, check out "The Creature from Jekyll Island: A Second Look at the Federal Reserve" by G. Edward Griffin.

If you want to know what money is and how it is created, check out "The Mystery of Banking" by Murray Rothbard free here: http://mises.org/Books/mysteryofbanking.pdf

When America left the gold standard for our current fiat (fake) currency system created by the architects of the monster from Jekyll Island, our Nation became doomed. By leaving our old system that was backed by a solid physical commodity to one that was created out of thin air by the Fed and then loaned to us was an incredibly arrogant form of treason.

Fractional Reserve Banking is a banking system in which banks are supposed to maintain a quantity of reserves from their depositors. This quantity is a fixed fraction of the amount of new money the banks are then allowed to create. This newly created money is then loaned to the bank’s borrowers.

Fractional reserve banking has a major flaw called insolvency. More commonly known as a "bank run" and is easy enough to understand. If the system’s depositors demand in excess of the reserve amount within a short time span, the entire system theoretically just runs out of printed capital and goes broke. To prevent this system crash, governments often resort to a massive printing of currency, resulting in massive devaluation of the currency and its eventual demise by hyperinflation.

Here is how fractional reserve banking works in the United States, using the current approximate 10% fractional reserve ratio requirement:

1) A depositor deposits $100 with a bank. (This depositor could be a citizen, or another bank,
Total Reserves: $100, Total Loans: $0, Total Money Supply: $100

2) The bank holds $10 for its reserves and loans out the other $90 to other banks or people. If it is a person, this money is temporarily held outside the banking system until they decide to deposit the money into a bank.
Total Reserves: $10, Total Loans: $90, Total Money Supply: $100

3) Next, the second bank takes the $90 in deposits, holds $9 for its reserves, and loans out the other $81.
Total Reserves: $19, Total Loans: $171, Total Money Supply: $190

4) Step 3 repeats. The third bank takes the $81 as a deposit, holds $8.10 for its reserves, and then loans out $72.90.
Total Reserves: $27.10, Total Loans: $243.90, Total Money Supply: $271

5) Step 3 repeats again. The fourth bank takes the $72.90 as a deposit, holds $7.29 for its reserves, and then loans out $65.61.
Total Reserves: $34.39, Total Loans: $309.51, Total Money Supply: $343.90

6) And so on. The bulk of the money creation is done after 15 repeats, but what is eventually left after 40 or 50 repeats is pretty much:
Total Reserves: $100, Total Loans: $900, Total Money Supply: $1000

So within a very short period of time, banks transferring to other banks within the system can CREATE $900 from the initial $100 deposit. For many, this process is so crazy that it is hard to grasp.

Here’s where it gets fun, when the FED buys Treasuries, although it is the same process for whatever asset they wish to purchase.

1) The FED’s Open Market Committee (FOMC) decides to expand the nation’s money supply and purchases, for example, $10 billion in Treasury bonds.
Monetary Supply Expansion: $0

2) The FED writes a check on itself for $10 billion. [Where did it get the money? FROM NOWHERE!]
Monetary Supply Expansion: $10 billion

3) This $10 billion FED check then goes to one of the government bond dealers (such as some of these companies getting bailed out) in exchange for the $10 billion in Treasuries.
Monetary Supply Expansion: $10 billion

4) Then the bond dealer deposits its $10 billion FED check at a bank.
Monetary Supply Expansion: $10 billion

5) Go to the fractional reserve loop above. And see how this deposit will very quickly be "grow" and lead to $10 billion in deposits and $90 billion in loans within the banking system.
Monetary Supply Expansion: $100 billion

And yes, the US government DOES pay interest on the Treasuries to the FED, which many are angered about, since the interest can never be paid back because there are not enough dollars in the banking system to ever clear all of the debt owed.
Many of the Congressmen and Senators that howl the most about the bailouts of all the criminal corporations involved in the Fed deception are only howling because they are not receiving the “campaign contributions” to maintain status quo.

The rest are showing true bi-partisanship and co-sponsoring Ron Paul’s bill. If you click on the link provided and then click show sponsors you will see the level of support by both parties.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-1207

"We can have a democratic society or we can have the concentration of great wealth in the hands of the few. We cannot have both."

-- Louis Brandeis, Supreme Court Justice from 1916-1939.

Law grinds the poor, and rich men rule the law.
-- Oliver Goldsmith

"The American Republic will endure, until politicians realize they can bribe the people with their own money."
-- Alexis de Tocqueville

Barney Frank is in the pay of the banks -- he was a leader in passing the Paulson bailout. If he is leading the charge in auditing the Fed then it means it's all a big smokescreen that will come to NOTHING.

"I know they purchased about $52 billion of toxicity from AIG last Fall (not a LOAN...an outright purchase of AIG assets and stuffed it all into Maiden Lane II and III...that junk could be close to worthless. "

This crap is "accounted for" on the NY Fed website, and apparently it has lost value since they purchased it (whoda thunk?), but I'm not sure whether it's being marked to market or what.

Here's the link to Maiden Lane I (Bear) and there are tabs for Maiden Lane II and III (AIG). At the bottom of each Maiden Lane page is a link with financial statements up to Dec 2008. I studied econ as an undergrad and did some M&A work right after college, but I still know NOTHING about accounting, so if anyone else wants to take a look, you could certainly help the rest of us understand what's going on.

http://www.newyorkfed.org/markets/maidenlane.html

@S. Gompers

I don't think the old system was much better than the current system other than the fact that it was backed by ANYTHING then. The point it that the Fed is loaning our government Federal Reserve Notes with interest that was never backed by their own assets - backed by our government's precious metals then and out of thin air now. It would be like me lending you Official Spideydouble Reserve IOUs with interest, after having you print them at Kinkos and charging you for the privilege - backed first by your own family jewels and then by nothing at all other than your ability to pay my IOUs back. It is equally treasonous that our congress, in their infinite wisdom, made Federal Reserve Notes the sole form of legal tender, excluding everything else, even tender with intrinsic worth.

@the goldman sachs coup

I agree with you regarding Barney Frank. This talk of his own alternate bill including a more restrictive Fed audit and preserving monetary policy is a smokescreen. If that passes, surely it will come to NOTHING.

Take a look at Frank's top campaign contributors for the last 2008 cycle: http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cycle=2008&type=I&cid=N00000275&newMem=N . Brown Brothers Harriman & Co. and Bank of America were top contributors. Due some diligence on Brown Brothers Harriman & Co. This is publicly recorded bribe money, not to mention what he may be taking under the table. Frank may very well be compromised.

While you are at it, look up President Obama's top campaign contributors for the 2008 cycle: http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00009638 . Goldman Sachs was his single largest corporate contributor. The best government money can buy ...

Paulson, Bernanke and and the BAC/Merrill deal.

Paulson says he did it, not Bernanke. (Lewis is still crooked as a snake.)

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124767091551845767.html?ru=yahoo

@ spideydouble

"I don't think the old system was much better than the current system other than the fact that it was backed by ANYTHING then."

To which I ask, what money would you prefer to see created other than a backed currency?

No system has ever survived using any of the many forms of fiat currency, as it has worth only as long as people recognize it has worth, and the money doesn’t exist to pay the debt. In our own nation you have but to look to the civil war to see the collapse of the south’s fake money after they lost the war.

To your point of: ”The point is that the Fed is loaning our government Federal Reserve Notes with interest that was never backed by their own assets - backed by our government's precious metals then and out of thin air now. “ I believe I stated “By leaving our old system that was backed by a solid physical commodity to one that was created out of thin air by the Fed and then loaned to us was an incredibly arrogant form of treason”. And then ”the US government DOES pay interest on the Treasuries to the FED, which many are angered about, since the interest can never be paid back because there are not enough dollars in the banking system to ever clear all of the debt owed”. I am one of the angry, and I understand the problem better than most due to my unique cicumstances.

I’ve seen some really good stuff you have been writing, but apparently you have not been reading my posts or you would see that I am completely against the Fed and their lackeys who suckle at the contributions (bribes) they hand out ( and that is both parties). You will see the co-sponsors change if they have to hand out more “contributions” to stop this, for that is what shapes policy .

I broke this down in the last post into layman terms for those who don’t realize how the Fed works and continues to think it’s Bush or Clinton, or Carter, etc. when it has been everyone since 1913 except Kennedy who tried to eliminate the Fed and was killed.

You might also want to look at this link for Mccain’s contributors and you will see that he has been feeding at the same trough of government bond dealers and bankers courtesy of the Fed, and maybe look up the Keating 5 to see there is no saint in him either, he's been at the trough a loooong time.

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cycle=2008&cid=n00006424

P.S. congress does not make or authorize Federal Reserve Notes and Goldman Sachs is one of the government bond dealers I mentioned above as well as many others that have been mentioned in these posts. They are taking care of their own with our money and changing who is in power under this system of government only means different names on the contribution checks.

"We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office."

-- Aesop

"If ye love wealth greater than liberty,
the tranquility of servitude greater than
the animating contest for freedom,
go home from us in peace.
We seek not your counsel, nor your arms.
Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you.
May your chains set lightly upon you,
and may posterity forget
that ye were our countrymen."

-- Samuel Adams

I'm guessing Obama will listen to THESE economists and their petition (unlike the hundreds of economists who opposed the "stimulus"). These economists want to maintain the "independence" of the Fed and oppose HR 1207.
Their ostensible fear is that interest rates would be kept too low for too long. Oh the irony.

http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/107347/5-Kinds-of-stores-discounting-deeply.html?mod=bb-budgeting&sec=topStories&pos=2&asset=&ccode=

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2009/07/15/petition-for-fed-independence%20/?mod=yahoo_free

@S. Gompers

"To which I ask, what money would you prefer to see created other than a backed currency?"

We are in agreement. I am by no means advocating or defending a fiat currency. I support a representative currency backed by real commodities. I think that you are missing my point that even before Bretton Woods and under it, the Fed was lending a currency to our government with interest based on our own assets rather than assets belonging to the Fed.

Just as the UK never returned to a gold standard post WWII under Churchill in order to avoid sovereign bankruptcy, I believe the U.S. equally needed to avoid a sovereign bankruptcy. Keynes argued against a gold standard and proposed a privately owned Bank of England, who by a continuous process of inflation could "confiscate, secretly and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens" rather than publicly elected officials doing so. This makes perfect sense. Wealth confiscation would no longer be arbitrary, but directed to enrich even fewer freeborn men of adequate pedigree and well-recommended. Governments could likewise temporarily borrow unencumbered from central bank monopolies rather than bargain shop rates from multiple independent competing banks.

Unfortunately, the new liberal international economic system of central banks under Bretton Woods never enhanced stability, sustainable monetary policy, nor peace. A series of one-upmanship by Charles de Gaulle divesting France’s dollar reserves in exchanged for U.S. Government gold and LBJ’s Société Minor debt slave programs and Vietnam War profiteering led Nixon to unilaterally terminate convertibility of U.S. dollars to gold in 1971 and the system likewise imploded. The suckers who had signed on to Bretton Woods and not followed France’s paper for gold exchange program now had a default world “reserve currency”. The irony is not lost on me. Additionally, U.S. atom bomb hegemony gave the U.S. the ultimate debt avoidance and collection tool. Your money is safe with the world’s top nuclear power. Of course, virtually universal conversion to fiat currencies and central banks may have been Adam Smith’s invisible hand at work all along benevolently directing humanity to utopia.

"I’ve seen some really good stuff you have been writing, but apparently you have not been reading my posts or you would see that I am completely against the Fed and their lackeys who suckle at the contributions (bribes) they hand out ( and that is both parties). You will see the co-sponsors change if they have to hand out more “contributions” to stop this, for that is what shapes policy ."

I do read your posts and agree with you. Keep up the great analysis.

@DailyBail

I've got nothing against Greider personally. He is a very intelligent and personable guy and a damn good journalist, but he, fright face Nancy Pelosi, and the filmmakers of this clip seem to be hyping his book "Secrets of the Temple" for sales and possibly to keep the curious in the dark about much better resources out there.

Greider does not explain money and banking at all and rather seems to promote the illusion that the Fed is another department of the U.S. Government - Constitution Ave HQ, roman columns, Great Seal, American flag and all - (okay, maybe I am overreaching here) and cheer leads their interest rate decisions in detail. Greider doesn't even give a thorough analysis of the history of the creation of the Fed and the backgrounds of the players involved. Secrets of the Temple? Hardly.

@ spideydouble

Thanks for the clarification, I was a little confused with the direction you were heading. I do enjoy your posts

The root is exposed, but without a complete changing of the guard the "audit" and or any type of investigation will just make things worst. It makes sense theat they would have one of their own "Barney Frank" endorse this in many ways. All devious, right down to the reverse psycology aspect. In my years of research I've found that the downward spiral of this Country is directly attributed to this gang of "chosen elites" mostly from a small, yet highly advanced Country far far away~ The world has to unite against this, or the fall will continue at an alarming rate. This is the one people. Let's do this!

After you do an audit and hearings and conclude the obvious - that the cozy relationships between Fed, Treasury and the Banks corrupt policy and shaft the tax payer - what do you do about it? How do you get the expertise needed within these institutions to oversee the industry without becoming beholden to it. I'll throw out possible elements of the solution. One would be to clip the wings of the Fed and give it a lot less lattitude to goose the money supply, since as long as it holds our checkbook the banks will find ways to control it. Second, limit financial products to things the overseers can understand and regulate. If that results in less "innovation" in financial services, I'm OK with that. Third, firms too big to fail are too big to exist - break them up and re-regulate. Fourth, limit or ban bank employees from treasury and Fed jobs.

@ Andrew

All very sensible elements of a solution. Please stick around this site and join the discussion.

The Penny King Advises President Obama and U. S. Congress to Consolidate Banking and Insurance Industry Giants

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1578455/the_penny_king_advises_president_obama.html?singlepage=true&cat=9

Of all the salient points posted here, and there are many, the one that stands out is, "do we really want to know?"

I remember being in eighth grade economics and telling my liberal teacher in order to get a rise, " I don't care if the world's money supply is secretly run by 12 men, as long as I'm one of them and the others are Jews." It was supposed to be a joke. I'm not one of them and God knows, I'm not sure I want to know what they've been doing...