1913 Federal Reserve Act was Illegal. Here is proof. What legal recourse do we have?

mrphilosophias
Andrew Jackson ended the Central Bank in the U.S. and paid off our debts by selling federal land. Perhaps we can pay off our debts by nationalizing our natural resources and renting them out to the record profit making oil companies.

Technically speaking (correct me if I'm wrong), since the USD isn't backed by anything now, there is no intrinsic value. Therefore, the debt is practically zero...just paper and ink plus whatever security measures they use. If the people's government takes over the printing press they can print to repay the debt to the Fed too, can't they?

On tonight, live from 10PM Eastern time!

Show thread with listening information

sweet! i'll be sure to tune in

Kurius

mrphilosophias
Andrew Jackson ended the Central Bank in the U.S. and paid off our debts by selling federal land. Perhaps we can pay off our debts by nationalizing our natural resources and renting them out to the record profit making oil companies.

Technically speaking (correct me if I'm wrong), since the USD isn't backed by anything now, there is no intrinsic value. Therefore, the debt is practically zero...just paper and ink plus whatever security measures they use. If the people's government takes over the printing press they can print to repay the debt to the Fed too, can't they?

edit on 9-4-2014 by Kurius because: (no reason given)

Article VI of the U.S. Constitution
All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.

14th Ammendment to the US Constitution
Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any state shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

On the surface neither of these seem to apply to the situation.

According to the St. Louis FED, only about $2.3 trillion of the approximately $17 trillion national debt is owned by the FED. To simply write off this debt would spell the end of the U.S. economy. I'm not sure we appreciate how many mutual funds, retirement funds, social security promissory demand deposits, etc. are tied up in the scheme. The effects of such action (writing off the debt as illegally incurred) would literally rivet the world economy. Without the proper approach it would not b e much different from a default. With this single action the faith and credit of the United States would be destroyed.

What viable alternatives are available are beyond me. I would imagine congressional committees in conjunction with economists, scholars, professors, etc, would be necessary to formulate some sort of creative alternative that strikes a balance between the interests of the American people, the security of the Republic, the preservation of the political philosophy of the constitution, and the interests of business. I can not foresee a plausible solution to the problem that doesn't also address the intrinsic deficiencies of other dubious aspects of contemporary politicoeconomics like campaign finance, lobbying, and corporate personhood which are so prone to abuse and corruption.

I do hope SS examines the events that led to the creation of the Federal Reserve Act, especially those pertaining to the Rockefellers, the collapse of the Knickerbocker Trust company (as well as Rothchilds Anaconda Copper Co) and the Bank Panic of 1907, Senator Nelson Aldrich's familial ties to John Rockefeller Jr. and his importance in creating the National Monetary Commission which led to the Federal Reserve Act the infamous Jekyll Island meeting (would be great if you could get Mr. Griffin on air to speak about this), and the conspiratorial nature of the events surrounding these points of data. Would also be great if they could delve into some of the findings of the Pujo Committee!

Not only is there a conspiracy of collusion by the banking magnates in the inception of the Federal Reserve, in violation of the Sherman Act, but there are some obvious conflicts of interest which call into question whether Aldrich, Rockefeller and co. were in violation of Section 18 of the U.S. Code.

I would also love for them to touch on the sentiments of some of the founding fathers of this nation in opposition to the central banking cartel, Andrew Jackson; the failure and irresponsibility of Keynsian economic theory in principle and practice, examine the socio-economic and political consequences that are inextricably connected to the passage of the Federal Reserve Act, which I contend was in violation of Federal law upon its passage. (e.g. the great depression and bankruptcy of the nation, the social security act and it's failings, the gold confiscation act, the Nixon shock, etc)

Leonidas

Justacasualobserver
reply to post by Leonidas

 

The system is going to collapse anyway. Just a matter of when.

So let's talk about a better alternative. Tearing down the Fed is one thing we can all get on board with,

I'm not.

To me it sounds like a symptom of religious faith, that "Everybody knows" the Fed is evil. Sort of like the blame on George Soros. (I've asked the question many times what awful things Soros has done and never get a clean, justified answer).

In reality, you need a central bank with authority over monetary policy and some kind of regulatory authority and, in the end, a 'matter of record' payment system (Fedwire). If you "end the Fed" you'll end up creating something pretty similar. Except this time, the lobbying power of the financial industry is even greater and it would be even less citizen friendly and more private profit friendly.

Documents of the National Monetary Commission

Pujo Committee “Money Trust” Wall Street Banking Cartel Investigation 1912-1913

I have some other stuff like archives newspaper articles and stuff if anyone is interested. I also have research involving the events surrounding the collapse of the Knickerbocker Trust co., the Bank Panic of 1907, and Anaconda Copper.

What I would like to get my hands on are the congressional minutes pertaining to the sessions of congress during which the Federal Reserve Act was introduced and passed, from both the House and Senate.

I think it would go a long way if it could be shown that Aldrich, being Rockefellers father in law, somehow profitted from the passage of the Federal Reserve Act.

It may be a pipe dream but any personal journals, letters, of any of those involved, including those with the Jekyll Island Club, along with any minutes from that meeting, if they exist, would be like gold to my research. While it may seem foolish to keep records of such conspiracies, it is my opinion that these business men are just that, shrewd business men, and it would seem an asset of shrewd business men to keep records.

mbkennel

Leonidas

Justacasualobserver
reply to post by Leonidas

 

The system is going to collapse anyway. Just a matter of when.

So let's talk about a better alternative. Tearing down the Fed is one thing we can all get on board with,

I'm not.

To me it sounds like a symptom of religious faith, that "Everybody knows" the Fed is evil. Sort of like the blame on George Soros. (I've asked the question many times what awful things Soros has done and never get a clean, justified answer).

In reality, you need a central bank with authority over monetary policy and some kind of regulatory authority and, in the end, a 'matter of record' payment system (Fedwire). If you "end the Fed" you'll end up creating something pretty similar. Except this time, the lobbying power of the financial industry is even greater and it would be even less citizen friendly and more private profit friendly.

You have been a voice of reason, albeit playing the devils advocate, and I can tell you are knowledgeable about the topic in discussion. Some questions:

Do you think the familial relationship between Senator Aldrich and John Rockefeller Jr. creates a conflict of interest relative to the creation and implementation of the Federal Reserve Act? Does their collusion constitute conspiracy, in the legal sense of the word?

Do you think it is a stretch to seriously ponder whether the events that surrounded the Bank Panic of 1907 were a deliberate plot by the shrewd bankers bloc to bring about the National Monetary Commission that would ultimately lead to the Federal Reserve Act? The same sort of question can be asked about the Bank panic of 1930, and the crisis of 1933 that led to the stock market crash and the great depression. These in turn were cause for other legislative action that empowered the banking bloc like the gold confiscation act, and the emergency banking power act. In your opinion, were these corollary causes of these crisis's intentional to strengthen the hand of the banking bloc?

You pointed out correctly that the FED is required to relinquish profits to the Treasury. Do these profits apply strictly to dividends paid by maturing U.S. Securities? How often are these profits 'turned over'? Is it plausible that the member banks, who are the custodians of these funds in the interim period between when these securities mature and when they are relinquished to the U.S. Treasury, invest or loan out these profits, and if so, are these 'second hand' profits also relinquished?

mbkennel

To me it sounds like a symptom of religious faith, that "Everybody knows" the Fed is evil. Sort of like the blame on George Soros. (I've asked the question many times what awful things Soros has done and never get a clean, justified answer).

In reality, you need a central bank with authority over monetary policy and some kind of regulatory authority and, in the end, a 'matter of record' payment system (Fedwire). If you "end the Fed" you'll end up creating something pretty similar. Except this time, the lobbying power of the financial industry is even greater and it would be even less citizen friendly and more private profit friendly.

Sounds like a symptom of Stockholm Syndrome. It is easy to find out what George Soros did too to the detriment of the masses around the globe if you are only ready to learn- I believe one of which is currency manipulation. If you think this kind of people get to be that filthy rich on sweat and hardwork alone based on ethics and morality, you are better off living in La-La land.

While I would agree with you that "you need a central bank with authority over monetary policy and some kind of regulatory authority", most people would like this authority to be entirely government controlled with strict check-and-balances in place. Who really owns the Fed now? Who are the stakeholders? Nobody really knows, but most are led to believe it's the nation and its people.

mrphilosophias

On7a7higher7plane
reply to post by mrphilosophias

 

This is re-distribution and it wouldn't really be a solution. It's like a broader version of our current system of corporate wellfare. When it comes to using re-distribution being a solution you have to think bigger otherwise it's just insignificant BS to the regular Joes in America. When it comes to your idea realize big corporate is more efficient than random bloaks x 300,000,000. How could you fix prices when the net effect is inflation?

Maybe I'm misunderstanding your idea.

I think you are misunderstanding the concept. I'll elaborate more in depth another time.

I don't think I am. You can't con-volute the message with details and expect me not to see through it. Giving what's basically free money to anyone who applies for it just for having a business seems easy to exploit. Imagine the amount of agents it would take to inspect every single small business. I think your idea is bunk.

mrphilosophias

According to the St. Louis FED, only about $2.3 trillion of the approximately $17 trillion national debt is owned by the FED. To simply write off this debt would spell the end of the U.S. economy. I'm not sure we appreciate how many mutual funds, retirement funds, social security promissory demand deposits, etc. are tied up in the scheme. The effects of such action (writing off the debt as illegally incurred) would literally rivet the world economy. Without the proper approach it would not b e much different from a default. With this single action the faith and credit of the United States would be destroyed.