Eight Presidents Who Opposed A Central Bank (Federal Reserve)

 by Tuskeegee
{Daily Paul Liberty Forum}


[An interesting 2014 perspective on the historical impact the banks have had in creating a central bank that effectively established a moneyed aristocracy around the Fed to manipulate the American economy for its own aggrandizement. - ED}

Since 1963, to this present day, the United States has remained under the control of the royal European banking elite through their control of the Federal Reserve who during this past nearly 60 years have all but dismantled what was once the great Nation known as the United States of America.

Through their infiltration of all levels of government, corporations and media, they have used their forces to destroy America’s “moral fiber” and reduce this once great power to but a shadow of its former self. Their once great industrial might is now gone, their schools are noted for their shockingly high dropout rates (even those who graduate know less than a child born a century ago), its once great cities are fast falling into ruin as its roads and bridges disintegrate too, and, perhaps worst of all, these once great people have nearly lost all hope.

The stage for this all occurring is being set now as the most pivotal day in the history of the United States is racing towards us all….December 21, 2012.

What I constantly argue is that without a central bank, talking about Afghanistan, Iraq, and now possibly Iran would be impossible,  because the government would have to go directly to an individual to raise taxes, and would therefore be impossible after the 100th house they visited. Central banking allows for money to be produced out of “thin air” to finance our overseas empire. This is where we get inflation folks!!!

Since someone reading this, will question my wisdom, I wanted to talk about 6 presidents that did stop a central bank under their administration.

General George Washington (1732-1799) who is credited with being the “Father of the Nation” for winning his Nation’s war of Independence from the British. Washington gained further fame by returning to his Virginia farm in the “spirit of Cincinnatus” after ending his second term of office and not, as many had wished, becoming a king.

General Andrew Jackson (1767-1845). A hero of the War of 1812 for defeating a superior British force at the Battle of New Orleans, Jackson was put into power to defeat the establishment of a Central Bank that was supported by President John Quincy Adams (1767-1848) and was feared would split the Nation.

Of the danger facing the United States should a Central Bank be allowed to gain control of the US economy Jackson warned:

The bold effort the present (central) bank had made to control the government … are but premonitions of the fate that await the American people should they be deluded into a perpetuation of this institution or the establishment of another like it. I am one of those who do not believe that a national debt is a national blessing, but rather a curse to a republic; inasmuch as it is calculated to raise around the administration a moneyed aristocracy dangerous to the liberties of the country.”

Directly to President Adams and the other Central Bank supporters Jackson said directly:

Gentlemen, I have had men watching you for a long time and I am convinced that you have used the funds of the bank to speculate in the breadstuffs of the country. When you won, you divided the profits amongst you, and when you lost, you charged it to the bank. You tell me that if I take the deposits from the bank and annul its charter, I shall ruin ten thousand families. That may be true, gentlemen, but that is your sin! Should I let you go on, you will ruin fifty thousand families, and that would be my sin! You are a den of vipers and thieves.”

Adams was enraged at his and the Central Banks defeat by Jackson and refused to attend his inauguration. To his dying day Adams retained a great hatred of this president and as a Member of the United States House of Representatives (the only American President to serve in this body after leaving office.) cast the only “no” vote on a law to give medals to the US Military officers who had served in the Mexican-American War (1846-1848). Immediately after casting his vote Adams collapsed and died two days later.

Abraham Lincoln (1809 - 1865) Upon President Lincoln’s assassination by those forces advocating a Central Bank he was succeeded by President Andrew Johnson (1808-1875) who, like Lincoln before him, opposed those European forces [the Rothschild's banking family alone was reported to have lost nearly $50 million in support of the Confederacy.] attempting to take control of the American economy and in further “outrages” against them forgave the Southern States of their debts, granted unconditional amnesty to all Confederate Soldiers, freed all remaining slaves in the United States, and paid back the Russian Empire for its blocking of a North American invasion by British and French forces by purchasing Alaska for $7.2 million.

For President Johnson’s continued opposing the aims of the Central Bankers he was greatly weakened by two attempts to impeach him from office [In 1926 the US Supreme Court ruled the basis for those impeachment attempts as unconstitutional.] thus necessitating the need to put General Grant in power.

General Ulysses S. Grant (1822-1885), who like Jackson before him was put into power to defeat those forces attempting to create a Central Bank said needed due to the United States massive debts incurred from their Civil War (1861-1865) and opposed by President Abraham Lincoln (1809-1865), who said:

The government should create, issue, and circulate all the currency and credit needed to satisfy the spending power of the government and the buying power of consumers. The privilege of creating and issuing money is not only the supreme prerogative of government, but it is the government’s greatest creative opportunity. The financing of all public enterprise, and the conduct of the treasury will become matters of practical administration. Money will cease to be master and will then become servant of humanity.”

Chester A. Arthur (1829-1886) who was also the first non-military member of the order to ascend to the Presidency but did so through the rules of primogeniture (right of first born) granted to him as the direct descendant of maternal grandfather and Revolutionary War leader Uriah Stone and was “established in place” to take power upon the assassination by these European bankers of President James A. Garfield (1831-1881).

President Garfield warned of the dangers to America should these Central Bankers ever gain power by stating shortly before his death in 1881, “Whoever controls the money of a nation, controls that nation and is absolute master of all industry and commerce. When you realize that the entire system is very easily controlled, one way or another, by a few powerful men at the top, you will not have to be told how periods of inflation and depression originate.

William McKinley (1843-1901) whose membership in the order was granted under their rules of primogeniture through his grandfather and American Revolutionary War hero David McKinley, and who by his own right had distinguished himself as a hero in the Civil War.

President McKinley began his attack against the Central Bankers with his ally and Secretary of State John Sherman (1823-1900) whose connection to his older brother and Civil War here General William Tecumseh Sherman (1820-1891). The legal tool used by President McKinley and Sherman against the European bankers was the law known as the “Sherman Antitrust Act” which was first brought to bear against the Rothschild supported and funded JP Morgan financial empire known as the Northern Trust who by the late1800′s owned nearly all of America’s railroads.

Shortly after President McKinley began his attack against the Central Bankers he was assassinated (1901) allowing his Vice President Theodore “Teddy” Roosevelt (1858-1919) to take power. Upon the Rothschild backed “and paid for” President Roosevelt taking office one of Roosevelt’s first acts was to drop the United States government lawsuits against the Northern Trust and accelerate the American age known as “Manifest Destiny” which continues to this day and basically gives these Central Bankers the “power” to plunder the entire World for profit and gain above all else.

The last chance to thwart the European plan to establish a Central Bank in the United States ended on April 14, 1912 with the deliberate sinking of the RMS Titanic by British agents that killed one of the orders members named Major Archibald Willingham Butt (1865-1912) along with the American business tycoons John Jacob Astor IV, Benjamin Guggenheim and Isidor Straus who were returning to the United States from Great Britain after what they believed was a successful “negotiation” with the Rothschild’s to “leave America alone” under “threat of war”

With the last “obstacles” removed from creating a Central Bank in the United States with the sinking of the Titanic the European banking powers forced through the American legal system what is known as the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 which once enacted (and remains to this day) became the sole and complete authority over the United States economy forcing the American people into two World Wars and countless other conflicts during the past 97 years all designed with one single purpose, to create for Europe’s royal families a “New World Order” controlled by them.

General Dwight David “Ike” Eisenhower (1890-1969), who was “appalled” over his Nations defacto surrender to Nazi German forces during World War II in order to obtain the atomic bomb Hitler was ready to use against them, and the deliberate murder of his close friend General George S. Patton (1885-1945) who upon his learning that Europe’s royal “powers” had delivered the atomic bombs secrets to the Soviet Union was ready to march against them.

Both Eisenhower and Patton, Sons of the American Revolution, were especially enraged over President Harry Truman’s (1884-1972) dropping of two atomic bombs on Japan.

President John F. Kennedy (1917-1963) with the election the country’s fortunes neared victory when on June 4, 1963 President Kennedy issued Executive Order 11110 which for the first time since 1913 returned to the United States government the power to issue currency, without going through the Federal Reserve (Central Bank).

Five months later, on November 22, 1963, President Kennedy was brutally assassinated while sitting by the side of his wife in a Dallas, Texas motorcade, an event so shocking that has continually been talked about through the ages.

For as this date is more well known as the end of the ancient Mayans long count calendar (and ending of the World?), it is also the date the Federal Reserve’s 99-year old charter to control the American economy ends. And, most importantly, for it to be renewed it would require not only a majority vote in both houses [Senate and House of Representatives] of the US Congress, but also a three-quarter majority vote by every one of their 50 States’ legislative bodies.

“We the people” have less than 2 ½ years to prohibit this “private corporation” from renewing.







Citibank Cuts Off Gun Businesses but Does Business With Iranian Terrorists

by Jack Davis


Citibank is being attacked for its recent actions to limit sales of legal firearms by critics who note that the massive bank was willing to do business with Iran a few years ago until it was fined by the Treasury Department.

“Citibank…they preemptively buckled under the pressure by refusing to cooperate with businesses that legally sell certain #firearms…Meanwhile, the Treasury Department found that same company, @Citibank, violated sanctions and did business with, wait for it…Iran!” NRATV tweeted, quoting spokesperson Dana Loesch.

Last week, Citibank said that it would no longer do business with legal firearms stores unless they agree to the bank’s most recent demands.

“Under this new policy, we will require new retail sector clients or partners to adhere to these best practices: (1) they don’t sell firearms to someone who hasn’t passed a background check, (2) they restrict the sale of firearms for individuals under 21 years of age, and (3) they don’t sell bump stocks or high-capacity magazines,” wrote Ed Skylar, executive vice president of global public affairs, on the bank’s blog.

Skylar insisted that the policy “is not centered on an ideological mission to rid the world of firearms.” “But we want to do our part as a company to prevent firearms from getting into the wrong hands,” he wrote.

But some noted that Citibank has, in the past, been willing to do business with groups that were banned by the U.S. government.

IRAN: THE ROLE OF CITIBANK – The New York Times – https://t.co/sLLNjjYWqB
Citibank refuses to do business with Companies who sell guns to Americans but they deal with Iran? Once again "To be a Democrat, you must first be a lying hypocrite."  — Larry Nelson (@southernarcher) March 27, 2018

In 2014, Citibank was required to pay $217,841, Reuters reported.

The Treasury Department said at the time that the bank was under investigation for violating multiple sanctions programs of the Office of Foreign Assets Control. It alleged that Citibank processed more than $750,000 worth of transactions to banned individuals or groups in Iran.

Loesch was not alone in criticizing the actions of the bank.

South Dakota state Rep. Kristi Noem, a Republican, said that the bank is trampling on the Americans’ rights.  “This is a constitutionally protected right. The Second Amendment is incredibly important to the people of South Dakota and what Citibank did was to come out and infringe on that right,” she told KSFY.

“I do not think it’s a business’s place to mandate to people, that they do business with, especially a bank, that they have to comply with their own set of rules and regulations,” Noem said.

RBC Wealth Management USA (Update 3/6/2019)

by Allen Williams

Royal Bank of Canada (RBC) is a huge conglomerate featuring global asset management which  “is the asset management division of Royal Bank of Canada” located  in Canada,  the United States, Europe, Asia-Pacific,  Middle East and Africa, Latin American and the Caribbean.   Your investments work hard to build the globalist vision of a new order.

RBC is the 12th largest bank in the world based on market capitalization and the fifth largest in North America.”  Barron’s notes that RBC Wealth Management is looking to Grow having actively recruited a significant number of high profile investment managers over the last 8 years.

But all is not well in the RBC golden world of investment as RBC is charged with Negligence and Elder Abuse   If you have a few bucks to invest and you’re of retirement age then beware because the wealth management brokerages are going to milk you. What do you mean by that remark you might ask?   Well, older people are prime targets for abuse by investment firms because the money is there and ripe for the taking and seniors tend to be overly trusting.

We’re already seeing evidence of this in RBC’s late December 2017 User Agreement modification. RBC blocks you from viewing your own account unlessl you agree to their terms.

RBC User Agreement, Section 7C:

"IN ADDITION TO AND WITHOUT LIMITING THE FOREGOING, RBC CM SHALL NOT BE LIABLE FOR ANY HARM CAUSED BY THE TRANSMISSION, THROUGH THE PROGRAM, OF A COMPUTER VIRUS OR OTHER COMPUTER CODE OR PROGRAMMING DEVICE THAT MIGHT BE USED TO ACCESS, MODIFY, DELETE, DAMAGE, CORRUPT, DEACTIVATE, DISABLE, DISRUPT OR OTHERWISE IMPEDE IN ANY MANNER THE AVAILABILITY OF THE INFORMATION OR ANY OF YOUR SOFTWARE, HARDWARE, DATA OR PROPERTY."

This statement also removes liability from the transfer of erroneous information from ‘typos’ and other such glitches which may cost you money.  


RBC Capital Markets, LLC
60 South 6th Street
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
Attention: Client Support Services, Mail Stop P12
Phone: 1-800-933-9946 (Weekdays 8:00am-10:00pm ET and Saturdays 10:00am-6:00pm ET)

The White law Group reports:According to The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, an all-public FINRA arbitration panel has awarded $212,000 to the estate of a former RBC Wealth Management client who had charged the firm with negligence and elder abuse.

"The attorneys of the client, the late Hazel Kitzman, charged that RBC Wealth Management engaged in the unauthorized sale of shares in the client’s account and in the unauthorized transfer of funds from an account at another firm. The attorneys requested compensatory damages of at least $1.5 million, treble  punitive damages and reimbursement of all legal costs, all of which the FINRA panel denied.”

Remember that ‘unauthorized RBC broker activity’ because we’ll see that again shortly. Think this is just sour grapes or a few disgruntled clients? Well, take a look at a host of other complaints as RBC Wealth Management Reviews compiles complaints summed  up nicely by ‘RK’ back  in January of this year with ”..Money sucking leeches. No fiduciary responsibility. Will suck you dry with fees.”

RBC Wealth Management meets that assessment.

Then there’s just the run of the mill abuse like a $140 yearly ‘account’ fee for not buying anything.  Remember interest rates are barely 3% and inflation is currently at 2.1%.  As a big or small investor you pay for not buying the financial investments a brokerage offers, even if you lose return on that investment.    The forced purchase of unwanted goods or services from corporations has become a global hallmark.  This policy causes older investors with smaller portfolios to purchase less desirable investments to keep their accounts from being pillaged by excessive and ruthless fees.

If you’re an elderly or a new retiree investor expect to be milked if you don’t know the ropes.  And, even if you do, the financial industry is structured such that there are no real penalties for fund mismanagement or cheating a client because the account holder must agree upfront to binding arbitration as a condition of getting an account   

Outside a court of law the odds swing dramatically in favor of the brokerage, so do not count on FINRA for any real relief.  The centralized global banking system is designed to extract wealth from the general populace virtually at will simply by changing the prime rate.   Fees for any alleged services are just icing on the cake.

The recent HSBC LIBOR rate fixing scandal illustrates just how easily the banks can cheat people and the Federal Reserve System has demonstrated how well its QE releases can rob the nations’ citizens of their purchasing power. 

These financial conglomerates own the various individual governments around the world and 20 trillion in debt buys a lot of favors.  Then there’s the annual revisions to Brokerage fee policies which can occur after you’ve committed significant resources to the firm.  Remember, whomever controls the money limits your options and ultimately controls you

Be sure and read the fine print in the RBC periodic account updates so you’re not surprised by the latest excursion into your back pocket.

Controlling the investor market is the key to successful brokerages because interest rates are rock bottom low in the public sector.  And, it’s risky for individuals to play the stock market or derivatives in today’s environment.  So offering investments priced slightly above what’s available at the trough guarantees a pool of people with above average financial strength. 


Managing RBC  Investments


Managing a brokerage account at RBC will tax your time as much as if you were actually a broker yourself,  from watching for mistakes in tabulated interest to your accounts to  buying financial instruments that you didn’t want  just to satisfy an order.  Here’s an example of what can happen, even if you watch, from last December as I purchased a financial instrument from BOFI federal through the brokerage:  “I did not authorize a purchase beyond the BOFI investment.  If an additional $2000 worth of BOFI was not available, you should have called me to ask if I wanted to buy something else offering the same terms.  Obviously, you didn't think it was worth asking me what I wanted to do with my own money.”

The RBC Broker’s reason for the snafu? Why a ‘typo’, what else? Note that elderly investors don’t have the time to make up losses from bad deals that their brokerage might recommend like zero coupon J.P. Morgan chase securities which can pay zero interest for months until the consumer price index increases.  

If you have more than one brokerage account, then you must be prepared to buy something within the specified time frame for each account.  If you don’t buy regularly in a calendar year then you pay an ‘inactivity fee’ under the following conditions.

First, investment maturity doesn’t count. If you have an existing security and it matures then you get no credit  for reinvesting that principal with that brokerage.  

Interest from other investments that pay into your brokerage account isn’t activity either, ‘activity’ is only new purchases that lead to the broker making a profit from your account.  So, why keep it there?  Because it will cost you another fee to close the account anywhere from $90.00 upwards. 

Pursuant to the RBC  ‘user agreement’, I bought another financial  instrument in January 2018 with an end of the month settlement date to avoid the penalty ‘for not investing’.  Sounds like the Obamacare penalty, doesn’t it?

I received the RBC purchase confirmation in the mail.  But at the end of January the capital was still in my investment account so the purchase was in doubt as my agreement with the broker stipulated the money was to be transferred after the 26th of the month. I had to call the broker to discover that they had bought the instrument with their own money. Why?  This is highly irregular. I’ve never had securities bought on credit before without my knowledge and so this experience was of some concern given the wording of their user agreement:  “..until payment is made by you, securities purchases by you or held by us for your account will be or may be hypothecated comingled with securities for other clients. If payment or delivery is not made by the settlement date, we reserve the right without further notice to charge interest on the amount due shown on the face hereof..”

And despite what the brokerage may tell you, there is a good chance that an interest charge will appear on the next statement. Also, guess who will be keeping the interest on the investment until the funds are transferred? So, if you can buy something on credit without client approval, why not double my order as well and hold me liable?

Even RBC’s instrument purchase confirmations are full of additional clauses that work against the account holder.  And there’s no recourse provision in these clauses for RBC negligence when a buy order isn’t executed because the user agreement requires client agreement to binding arbitration instead of a court of law or you don’t get the account.  So to find out what additional fees may have been dumped on you in a given transaction, you must request an explanation in writing or you get nothing: .this transaction may have incurred other fees..a complete breakdown of fees associated with the transaction  will be provided on your written request..”

In December,of this year I transferred my account to another broker using the RBC system. RBC like many large banks earns its money by gouging clients with outrageous fees as the loan industry is no where near as lucrative. And fees aren't subject to the same scrutiny as loan interest.

I was charged a $125 fee for transferring my holdings to another financial adviser even though the funds remain at RBC. Then I was charged an additional $45.79 for electronic transfer of my records to the other adviser within the same bank.  As RK aptly noted, they are 'money sucking leaches..'

UPDATE 3/6/2019

I discovered that RBC was holding the proceeds from one of my investments, $200 plus a $125 fee.

I immediately sent off a letter of protest to Warren Bischoff, the RBC Complex Director taking issue with the transfer charge on my investments moving within the same bank to another broker. After several weeks of non response from RBC, I wrote a letter of complaint in January of 2019 to both the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) and Comptroller of the Currency (as the latter regulates all foreign banks) to protest this outrageous fee. Shortly after getting my letter off to the regulating agencies, RBC reversed the fee.

After I had contacted FINRA, in early March of 2019 $325 dollars was refunded to my new brokerage account. To date I have not heard from Comptroller of the Currency as apparently this case did not fall under their jurisdiction.


If you’re looking for a place to invest, look well beyond RBC‘s client satisfaction hokum.





The FULL List of 92 Paychecks Hillary Collected From Wall Street

By Robert Gehl      

The media’s going nuts that Hillary Clinton took three big paychecks for three speeches at Goldman Sachs. At $225,000 a pops that’s pretty good scratch – but it’s just the tip of the iceberg.
 
She’s been very, very busy, raking in millions in a three-year stretch since she left her post as the Secretary of State. Her defense?  It varies from “It’s what they offered me” to the hilarious, “I happen to think we need more conversations about what’s going on in the world.”

Pricey “conversations” indeed.

Here’s a list of the 92 “conversations” that Clinton has had in just the past three years. The total: $21.7 million.

She’s been very, very busy. What did Hillary promise in all these speeches?  What was her advice to Deutche Bank, Cisco and the Council of Insurance Agents? What did she tell eBay?  Or the “American Camping Association” and why on earth would the American Camping Association pay $260,000 to hear from Hillary?
 
Has she ever been camping? We may never know because she refuses to tell us.
 
What Hillary discloses to us peasants is on a “need to know” basis only.  H/T: zerohedge, Hannity.com





Robert Gehl is a college professor in Phoenix, Arizona. He has over 15 years journalism experience, including two Associated Press awards. He lives in Glendale with his wife and two young children.


Wells-Fargo's 'How-To Fraud Mortgage' Manual

by Clinton Kirby

 

Wells Fargo's "How-to fraud mortgage  manual" suggests this "Too Big To Fail" bank may be going down.  Here's the link to download the actual Wells Fargo  'how-to create mortgage fraud' manual.


So, once again, the "conspiracy theory" that banks manufacture/massage/manipulate the documents they need-but don't have-in the foreclosure context has proven to be fact.  Indeed, the whistleblower that went to Naked Capitalism regarding Wells Fargo a year ago was not just, whistling Dixie, as it turns out. Wells Fargo indeed doctors/manufactures documents, and according to a lawsuit in New York, they actually have a manual on how to do it!  Naked Capitalism quotes a New York Post article about the lawsuit:

 "In a filing in New York's Southern District in White Plains for
 a local homeowner in bankruptcy, attorney Linda Tirelli described
 a 150-page Wells Fargo Foreclosure Attorney Procedures Manual
 created November 9, 2011 and updated February 24, 2012. According to
 court papers, the Manual details 'a procedure for processing
 [mortgage] notes without endorsements and obtaining endorsements
 and allonges.'"

If Wells Fargo does it, you can rest assured that the other big banks do it-after all, they have to compete! Check out this quote that gets right to the heart of the kind of thinking that causes this copycat, groupthink fraud from an article entitled "Fiduciary Duty to Cheat? Stock Market Super-Star Jim Chanos Reveals the Perverse New Mindset of Financial Fraudsters"

"Because if now, as the senior member of a bank, or the board of a
bank, I know that there are no criminal penalties for breaking the
rules, don't I have a fiduciary responsibility to my shareholders
to actually play fast and loose? Because if I get caught, that's
just the cost of doing business?" 

Yep. All the banks are doing it, not just Wells Fargo. We just don't have the other banks' manuals - yet.