PAF
Member

Yes, they are regulars on CNBC shows as talking heads. I don't watch CNBC anymore because I got tired of paying to be gaslit by Wall St, and I've mostly figured out their big scam psyop, but there's still no denying that placing DEI/ESG above profitability (which those ladies do usually subtly advocate for) is a recipe for business destruction, probably intentionally even. Go woke go broke....less competition and more consolidation is end result. ------------------------ Perhaps not that important individually but what if the swaps basket is a bunch of "dying brick-n-mortar meme stocks", not just GME? GME was one that wasn't expected to survive but just turned profitable and has an investor base most companies would kill for and has also been (naked) shorted, thanks to CS being the shorting counterparty to Archegos swaps, many times the float. (Never mind that the available float of shares is being locked away via direct registration and thus not borrow-able for further shorting.) UBS now needs to unwind the swaps somehow. Surely here are other nasty positions that CS held, also, which UBS is now on the hook for. This also explains the super low valuation offered for CS and the huge central bank backstops and central bank currency swaps pledged.

Deliberately.

Do remember that DC is sovereign from the 50 states and is essentially under martial law and has been since Reconstruction (Act of 1871), so Constitutional protections that apply in the 50 states via state constitutions and the 1789 Bill of Rights do not apply in DC (fringed flag, admiralty/pirate military flag, conquer, pillage, plunder). This is the legal and historical basis that explains how they have treated the J6 folks. War criminal treatment essentially, since DC is under martial law. Something going down in New York wouldn't be nearly as easy to "lock them up and throw away the key" as it is in DC. ---------------------------------------- That didn't take long: DeSantis attacks NY DA over Trump case https://www.cnbc.com/2023/03/20/desantis-rips-manhattan-da-bragg-over-possible-trump-charges.html

x-post from "2 banks about to collapse thread", regarding UBS taking on CS' swaps (which likely include GME and other "meme stock" short positions), which UBS plans to unwind. http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?560448-2-major-banks-about-to-go-under&p=7163042&viewfull=1#post7163042

Here's something the media isn't covering. The press conference held about the merger practically admits that UBS is now stuck with the GME swaps that blew up Archegos, then blew up Credit Suisse. UBS chair says they will start unwinding CS's (paraphrase) "risky swaps positions" that do not line up with UBS conservative goals. His comments track exactly with my posts on the GME/meme stock short positions via swaps that CS got stuck with. Now UBS is stuck with them. Huge backstops via central banks now? hmmm

I'm not predicting it will happen but the set-up scenario is there and would generate more clickbait headlines and drama, which is part and parcel to election season (Swordy is lickin' his chops at the thought). I guess the difference is that I think there is no genuine conflict between DeSantis and Trump and it's all performance art for the masses. The gifs I posted try to demonstrate that. You may have a different opinion. The near absurdity of the nature of potential charge against Trump, regarding paying Daniels, pretty much stinks of being contrived and timed, especially when any one who has looked deeper into the Trump history knows there's much more meat on that bone to go after if building a real criminal case is the goal. He and his family have thrived from outright fraud and misrepresentations for at least the last 8 years.

Apparently you do not interact much with the average social media consuming modern woman of today's America. I'm not much of a MGTOW type and I generally appeal to the opposite sex but I can definitely see why MGTOW is taking off and why a Tesla Robo-Wife would be successful.... On topic: Crime is the cover story for facial recognition. Marketing to and tracking of the "products" (meaning customers not stuff on the shelf) is the real reason.

Guilty as charged. I scroll past your packaged posts as a rule since I already know there will be no original thought or content provided.

^^^^^^^^^Now that's an organic post, and not a prepackaged bot post if I've ever seen one. Totes compiled by Swordy as original thought and posted as such! Something about flooding the zone, information overload and everything the American public believing is false....

I'm totes sure that there will be no drama regarding a Trump arrest in Florida and DeSantis' responsibility as Governor of Florida to determine whether to allow such an arrest. Just like there was no drama regarding GWB's election hinging on Florida while his brother was Governor of the state.

If I recall correctly, TARP and Fed backdoor bailouts were pushed onto a lot of banks who claimed they didn't even need a bailout, as their exposure to the melting down assets at the time was limited. I don't know if SunTrust was one of them who didn't really need a bailout, though. Truist recently completed a big new HQ tower here in Charlotte (quietly a big banking city) and it sits right next to BOA's HQ (where the notorious murals hang) in the city skyline. In hindsight, the merger of SunTrust and BB&T (which took about 3 years to complete) was a sign that it would be hanging around.

The bailout of First Republic Bank is an admission of which banks will be saved. While I don't particularly wish to advocate for supporting TBTF banks (or any bank for that matter), there's no denying what is being telegraphed, since the bank collapses so far are "elite" banks and the responses follow accordingly, which of course get the attention of elite accounts. https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/first-republic-bank-shares-crash-exploring-strategic-options Consolidation of the banking sector ahead of digital currency implementation.

I'm not sure why my post was quoted, since Trump wailed at the old Knights Templar fort wall also. My position that they're all selected shills if they get the mass media free publicity treatment is pretty well known around here. They use the appearance of opposition to herd masses around and it seems to work pretty damn well. I guess some people still believe WWE is real, too, though....

Mr. Yellen admitted that only certain failed banks will see uninsured deposits made whole again. "Systemic risk". What Mr. Yellen means is "Systemic risks to rich people's accounts and investments". All others can pound sand when their bank goes tits up. SVB was loaded with billionaire's and other elite's money and investments so FDIC STATUTORY limits don't apply somehow. Same with First Republic. It's mostly rich people's accounts there, hence the likely bailout by other banks. https://www.cnbc.com/2023/03/16/svb-signature-bank-failures-yellen-says-us-banking-system-is-stable-and-deposits-remain-safe.html I guess the "The deposit accounts of a corporation engaged in any “independent activity” (as defined in § 330.1(g)) shall be added together and insured up to the SMDIA in the aggregate" language in the federal FDIC statute (Title 12-III-B-330) is now officially "may or may not, depends on if you're rich or not and if you're woke or not." (perhaps the differences between US Code applyin to "US Citizens" and maybe not all others? hmmm food for thought)

You're still not providing anything concrete to judge by, just a few vague, ambiguous statements about your beliefs that don't provide enough info to determine much of anything. Despite the fact that it appears to me that we might be about to start playing the definition game, let me try to help you out here. Let's say that I own and work on a farm. This farm was legitimately homesteaded by my ancestors and has been in my family for several generations. Let's also say that my farm is situated in a region in your hypothetical world that imposes taxes but does not "forcefully oppose" secession. How do I go about seceding so as to not pay the taxes? What does that look like? Another scenario: Suppose my farm is situated in a region where the people are fascist. Again, I want NOTHING to do with their fascism. How do I "opt out"?

Seems like a reasonable time to bump this thread back up. Ides of March today, equinox on the 20th, (3-22)-(2023) a week away.

Bankers desperately want to get black folks and other minorities into the contractual banking (and taxation) system, since minority economies have centered greatly on physical cash transactions, which otherwise do not involve contracts with banks and/or the IRS. Cashapp and the like is a major method to do it. Cash transactions are voluntary and non-contractual with the IRS, since FRNs are statutorily a claim on the Treasury, not the Fed (IRS is collection agency for the Fed-->IMF). The fine print of the various digital 3rd party provider agreements is that they will report transactions to the IRS as required by tax code. $600 statutory limit is relevant to this agenda now. Why do you think every bank website has homepage pictures of minorities "enjoying" their banking access? Go look for yourself. It's a subcontext of the woke agenda. Older minority generations are wary of "the man" and used cash and taught that to later generations. Breaking that pattern is required if physical cash is to be eliminated.

This is a clue that the Fed will not slow rate hikes, which really only serve to squeeze Main St with higher rates, since SVB has shown that regardless of market value of bank paper asset holdings, they will receive fantasy valuations while Main St will not. With exploding credit card debt alongside rising interest rates, the banks pull in more cash from Main St servicing increasing debt which is transferred to the FDIC to backstop Wall St's selected institutions/investors. Indeed, there are no more indirect government taxpayer bailouts via Congressional legislation like TARP, which is true at least. Direct squeezing now instead of indirect before. But just for a history reminder...remember that Sen. Warren was TARP Administrator. She went on Real Time with Bill Maher back then and laughed about how she had no clue where all that money went. But she's the people's anti-banking Senator now, dontchaknow.

He wailed. The rest is performance.

There was a video floating around on the net a few weeks ago taken from an FDIC oversight committee meeting, where they essentially admitted that bank runs are coming and how to mitigate them (transparency and communication). Any way, this SVB crash may have been a test to gauge how quickly markets and people will respond to fast insolvency (overnight) crashes in the age of social media saturation. Here's a list of a bunch of banks in similar positions as SVB. The recent banks shuttered are on the list, along with a bunch of others that have not yet. If you have any money or assets with those banks, you know what to do! https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/savingandinvesting/20-banks-that-are-sitting-on-huge-potential-securities-losses-as-was-svb/ar-AA18tAxj

No, they aren't taking the limits off. They're just displaying that such rules are flexible, depending on who you are and what you do. Reminds me a bit of social credit score conditioning, actually. Are you woke XYZ firm doing ABC? This is your set of rules. Are you not? Over there is your set of rules.

According to Thomas Massie, they're already figuring out how to use this to institute more social media censorship. It's for your protection, of course, not to further shield bankers from exposure and let insiders withdraw their cash from failing banks while the public is silenced and made to stay ignorant until after their bank has collapsed. https://twitter.com/RepThomasMassie/status/1635074378454147074 Massie said the reply was "We'll get back to you on that."

Hasn't Wall Street suffered enough lately? Come'on IRS, read the room.

While the details in these CNBC write ups are clear as mud, it's a not-a-bailout bailout. Not taxpayers making depositors whole again or rescuing the failed banks but rather the FDIC, funded by the banking sector (allegedly), backstopping depositors (apparently the statutory $250k cap is flexible as long as you're a woke tech company, all others pound sand). And yet another Fed SPV conjured into existence to ensure hand-picked banking entities survive further fallout. Fed will value SPV collateral (Treasuries and MBS, etc) at mark-to-fantasy values, not mark-to-market values. https://www.cnbc.com/2023/03/12/regulators-unveil-plan-to-stem-damage-from-svb-collapse.html https://www.cnbc.com/2023/03/13/wall-street-not-taxpayers-will-pay-for-the-svb-and-signature-deposit-relief-plans-.html

Without. concrete examples of where you allege Larken to be wrong, to be engaging in an “overclassification of calling people statists,” ( not even quite sure what you exactly mean there) or exhibiting “a complete lack of understanding of legitimate nuance,” nothing you’ve said above amounts to much more than your own completely unsupported assertions. In my own experience, typically when people accuse Larken of being wrong, it’s not because he actually IS wrong, but because they actually ARE supporting or advocating for some level of statism, want to keep on doing so, and yet want also to be considered morally correct in the process. In other words, they want to have their cake and eat it too. Most of the time they simply don’t like him because he shines an uncomfortable light on their own cognative dissonance. Larken is mostly right. This stuff isn’t particularly difficult or complicated to figure out. Most people want to make it difficult or complicated in order to maintain their own pet statist ideas and policies while at the same time maintaining their own view of themselves as one of the “good guys.”

And here, L. Neil Smith was saying the same kind of thing all the way back in 2000: http://www.ncc-1776.org/tle2000/libe68-20000331-07.html