See other ObamaNation Articles
Title: MORE BANKS COLLAPSING, MASSIVE Trading Halts In Place, Bond Market Predicts TOTAL SYSTEM COLLAPSE
Source:
TimCast
URL Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXStGDdC61k
Published: Mar 13, 2023
Author: Tim Pool
Post Date: 2023-03-13 15:50:55 by Esso
Keywords: None
Views: 470
Comments: 28
Poster Comment: I think Tim's being a little excitable due to his inexperience in the markets. It's not as bad as he's making it out to be. It looks like the DJIA crossed the UNCH line about a dozen times today and will probably close about flat. The big winners are Bitcoin, silver and gold, up 15%, 6.5% and 2.5%. It's a little disturbing that Bidet's degenerate freakshow is backstopping $250,000+ accounts. That's not how the FDIC is supposed to work. I suppose the day could've been a lot worse.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 16.
#6. To: Esso, Horse (#0)
I was trying to figure that out hours before you posted that. And it was going very slowly because my computer was crawling. I couldn't even watch but a few minutes of this video; it just kept spitting, until just now. I finally got to the point where Tim says they are paying the big guys...again. Taxpayers BAILED OUT the too big to fail BANKS. Now the little people aka as "depositors" are BAILING IN it sounds like to save the big guys. That's what I'm gathering, anyway. From a couple of comments I read yesterday...please someone, read, and tell me if this is what's happening... (I originally started putting this together yesterday maybe around noon, to respond to one of Horse's posts): Tweet at HenryMakow: "MeidasTouch https://twitter.com/MeidasTouch/status/1634777100350783489 .... "MeidasTouch Mar 11 "Greg Becker sold $3.6 million in company stock just days before the bank's collapse. " ==================================== [4um..."Biden: "Americans can rest assured that our banking system is safe," he reiterated. Biden made clear that investors in the failed banks will not be protected. "They knowingly took a risk, and when the risk didn’t pay off, investors lose their money," he said, adding that the people running the troubled banks should be fired. " https://freedom4um.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=270312&Disp=All ]. comments at the twitter *** " g smith Some people just can't see the writing on the wall. Its been known for almost 2 years that banks are in big trouble due to greed not about depositors. Like someone said "I trust my money being under the mattress more than laying in a bank" The FDIC has only $1.xx for every hundred you have in a bank if it goes bust up to I believe $10.000 or so, more than that amount they have only .77 cents per hundred dollars to give back. So, if you have $1.000.00 in the bank and it goes bust the FDIC will "cover your loss" to the tune of $10-20. SMDH" *** " crabby 2 days ago as of 2010 the dodd frank act ,, the banks can take your money.. before,, your money was separate from the banks money.. not now.. because you are an un-secured investor ..nobody forced you to give your money to the bank.. you choose to do it .. you are an investor because they pay you interest .. you invested your money in the bank.. when the bank fails,, un-secured investors are at the back-o-the-line.. pennies on the dollar ,, if your lucky.." from one of two MeidasTouch twitter feeds... soooo, is this true? Is this "Depositor" vs. "Investor" vs. "taxpayer" (Biden or Janet Yellen or both said "taxpayers will not be bailing out the banks ...maybe here is where I read it: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/mar/12/silicon-valley-bank-collapse-no-bailout-janet-yellen )...double-speak on the part of Biden and Yellen? I have no idea, but it does seem they have been on a mission to crash the economy and have the banks collapse, to bring in their Great Reset, no? ========= Here's more: Silicon Valley Bank has now collapsed, and 95% of deposits were uninsured [[??]] Friday, March 10, 2023 [you might want to go back and read the whole article for what might be pertinent details for you people that understand this stuff...(I found this interesting, having read somewhere the little guy at the end of the line might be offered some stock in the failed bank instead of his money: "The share sale will come in three parts. The first, amounting to $1.25 billion, will be in the form of common stock and will be offered to investors.") and as I got to the bottom of this article I NOW see where there is a LINK to these BAIL-INS I was reading about...and in my pea-brain, without having gone yet to the link, it sounds like they have pulled a fast one.] Silicon Valley Bank scrambling to reassure clients to keep money in bank Despite the warnings from venture capital firms Silicon Valley Bank executives are trying to do everything they can to reassure their clients that the bank won’t collapse. Greg Becker, chief executive officer of SVB Financial Group, the bank’s parent company, held a conference call with clients on Thursday, March 9, advising them to “stay calm” amid concerns about the bank’s financial position. The roughly 10-minute call with investors was held at about 11:30 a.m. Pacific Standard Time. Becker asked his bank’s clients to continue supporting the bank the way it had supported them over the past 40 years. He went on to reassure them that their money in the bank is safe. “My ask is just to stay calm, because that’s what’s important,” said Becker. “The last thing we need you to do is panic.” [[says the guy who took his millions out of his bank right before it collapsed..."clients"/"investors"...who's who, I wonder.]] He did not provide the conference call attendees with any opportunity to ask questions. Silicon Valley Bank is a crucial lender for early-stage businesses. The bank has become a partner for nearly half of all venture-backed technology and healthcare companies in the United States that are listed on stock markets in 2022. Learn more about the state of the American market at MarketCrash.news. Watch this episode of the “Health Ranger Report” as Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, warns of the coming bank bail-ins that are intended to keep failing banks afloat. https://www.naturalnews.com/2023-03-10-silicon-valley-bank-on-verge-of-collapse.html Here's the link to the "coming bail-ins", where Mike will most likely explain what's going on. https://www.brighteon.com/a42dbd8f-9f3c-4f62-93a1-5b3041950f40 I haven't watched it, and probably won't be able to. ==================== again... Biden made clear that investors in the failed banks will not be protected. "They knowingly took a risk, and when the risk didn’t pay off, investors lose their money," he said, If he's saying what I think he's saying, I'd say no, the little guy putting his money in the bank, getting a few cents per year interest, and losing thousands due to Biden inflation, didn't know he was an "investor" and not a "depositor", and thought his hard-earned money/retirement was safe and insured. I'd say no way-in-hell was there full disclosure, which makes it FRAUD of the highest order. Fraud vitiates all contracts. No wonder they recently outlawed lynching, and are going hard after the guns. ============== One more thing. I looked up the Dodd-Frank Act looking for this bail-in thing the commenter in the twitter article was referring to. I couldn't get very far. I was getting bleary-eyed from reading all their gobbledy-gook. It brought to mind what Jesus said to the Pharisees, who control us to this day, "You make many laws grievous to be born, and don't lift [[do]] one with your little finger." All I saw was this: (Sec. 335) Amends the FDIA and the Federal Credit Union Act (FCUA) to increase permanently the maximum federal deposit insurance and federal share insurance amount from $100,000 to $250,000. Makes such increase retroactive to January 1, 2008... "Subtitle D: Other Matters - ... (Sec. 342) Requires each agency to establish an Office of Minority and Women Inclusion responsible for all matters of the agency relating to diversity in management, employment, and business activities. Requires the Director of each such Office to develop and implement procedures for inclusion and utilization of minorities, women, and minority- and women-owned businesses in all business and activities at all federal agency levels, including procurement, insurance, and contracts. (Sec. 343) Amends the FDIA and the FCUA to require that a depositor's ((??)) net amount maintained at an insured depository institution in a noninterest-bearing transaction account is fully insured. ..." https://www.congress.gov/bill/111th-congress/house-bill/4173 Is Sec. 343 where they made the switcheroo? What did the big guys ("clients"?) have I wonder. Non-interest bearing checking accounts? I wonder where all the definitions are. What's that verse from the Talmud about it being permissible to "Use subterfuge with the goyim."
FDIC WARNING LETTER TO SOMEONE WARNING ABOUT BANK BAIL-INS "...March 18, 2020 VIA U.S. MAIL/EMAIL Mr. David Schroeder Re: “Wall Street’s Worst Nightmare” advertisement [[Here's what the ad said: From: Newsmax.com Dear Newsmax Reader: Please take a moment to read the special message from our advertising sponsor, Monetary Gold. Our sponsors help us keep our news service free, though we do not necessarily endorse this message. Picture This, You Wake Tomorrow To Discover That Your Bank Emptied Your Checking and Retirement Accounts And Used The Money To Pay Its Debts You Have No Legal Standing, No FDIC Coverage, And No Money In Your Account - It's Gone FOREVER! Look My Friend, I write this to you with the utmost urgency. What I just described to you is the new law of the land and It was signed into law in 2010 under then President Barack Hussein Obama. It's known under many different names: The Dodd-Frank Act. - 4 - March 18, 2020 Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act Public Law 111–203 H.R. 4173 Bank Bail-In (Google this search phrase: Dodd–Frank Bail–In) The law states that a U.S. bank may take its depositors’ funds (i.e. your checking, savings, CD's, IRA & 401(k) accounts) and use those funds when necessary to keep itself, the bank, afloat. That means: if your bank makes bad investments in derivatives or makes bad loans to sub-prime borrowers or manages the bank poorly and can’t service its debt or even worse the U.S. economy has another 2008 collapse Instead of that bank going bankrupt and the bank’s assets sold off to be given back to its depositors... Now the bank simply keeps your money and guess what? The bank is no longer bankrupt. Did you read that? The Bank Keeps Your Money. And here is the kicker, YOUR ACCOUNT IS NOT FDIC INSURED WHEN THE BANK TAKES YOUR MONEY. NOT ONE SINGLE PENNY. It’s the law of the land and there is nothing you can do about it...]] the FDIC lawyer goes on to warn: "...In the event of a failure of an insured depository institution, regardless of its size or whether it is part of a larger enterprise, the FDIC would resolve the insured depository institution using authorities granted in the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (FDI Act)—not the Dodd Frank Act—and customers’ deposits would be fully insured up to the $250,000 limit. As the primary Federal regulator charged with interpreting the FDI Act and insuring consumer deposits up to the relevant limits, we have a statutory and regulatory interest when representations are made regarding deposit insurance. In our view, your representations may violate various Federal and state laws. The FDI Act prohibits any person from “knowingly misrepresent[ing] . . . the extent to which or the manner in which any deposit liability, obligation, certificate, or share is insured under this chapter, if such deposit liability, obligation, certificate, or share is not so insured, to the extent or in the manner represented.” 12 U.S.C. § 1828(a)(4)(B)(ii). This FDI Act provision, along with 12 U.S.C. § 1828(a)(4)(E), gives FDIC the authority to take enforcement actions against any company violating this law, including but not limited to the authority to issue civil money penalties up to $10,245 per violation per day. Federal criminal law prohibits “falsely advertis[ing] or otherwise represent[ing] by any device whatsoever the extent to which or the manner in which the deposit liabilities of an insured bank or banks are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.” 18 U.S.C. § 709. In addition, Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, (15 U.S.C. § 45) prohibits unfair or deceptive advertisements, as does the California Deceptive Practices statute. We expect your company to correct your advertisements and oral presentations. We also expect you to contact me with your response. You can reach me by email (to rischwartz@fdic.gov)...." www.fdic.gov/news/press-releases/2020/pr20037a.pdf so who's right? Newsmax/MonetaryGold or FDIC/FDI/Richard Schwartz/et al? did it come to pass as warned? Maybe FDIC/FDI/Richard Schwartz/et al should be hoisted on their own petard. For starters.
From Epoch Times (almost forgot...saw this yesterday too): "How Dodd-Frank Made It Legal for Banks to Confiscate Funds During a Banking Crisis By GSI Exchange Should another financial crisis befall us, rendering a number of too-big-to-fail banks insolvent, the good news is that taxpayers will no longer be forced to bail them out. The bad news is that these large Wall Street banks can now legally bail themselves out internally (referred to as “bail-ins”) using depositor funds. Thanks to Dodd-Frank, if you happen to hold your money in a savings or checking account at a bank, and that bank collapses, it can legally freeze and confiscate your funds for purposes of maintaining its solvency. So instead of relying on government funds (taxpayer money) to save itself from going bankrupt, a bank can simply dip into your deposit accounts to stabilize itself. To compensate you, the bank will exchange your money for its equivalent value in company shares. In other words, if a bank fails, it takes your money and hands you an equivalent amount of shares in its failing operation. Ethical? No. Legal? Yes. Let’s look at it from a big-picture perspective: a bank takes on reckless risks, achieves near-bankruptcy, crashes the economy in the process (as what happened in 2008), and retains the privilege of seizing your money to save itself? Where’s the accountability in all this? How is this even legally permissible? Well, thanks to Dodd-Frank, banks can legally activate orderly liquidation authority, as stated in Title II of the act. When you open a checking and savings account, the money you then deposit legally belongs to the bank. So if you don’t technically “own” your own money, then what do you own? Simple. You own an “IOU” issued by the bank. From the bank’s perspective, your money is an unsecured debt. Sadly, Dodd-Frank has set the whole thing up so that derivatives—highly leveraged assets—take precedence over your deposit accounts when it comes to banks paying off their debts. Counterparties to these derivatives get first dibs; customer deposits are secondary. Sure, the FDIC may attempt to come to your rescue. The problem is that the FDIC’s total assets, which are in the billions, are dwarfed by the value of outstanding derivatives, which are in the trillions. Although your deposits are protected up to the maximum insurance limit of $250,000, this promise is predicated on the FDIC having enough funds to cover each and every account holder’s deposit claims. Take JPMorgan Chase and Bank of America, as both have commingled derivatives with deposits. Both have deposits totaling well over $1 trillion. And both hold outstanding derivatives whose total values exceed the entire global GDP. What happens if they become insolvent? Such a disaster would trigger orderly liquidation authority protocols. In short, a “bail-in.” Title II orderly liquidation authority essentially allows the banking system to freeze your funds and take 50 percent or more of it in order to save the bank’s balance sheets, similar to what happened in Cyprus during their financial crisis in 2012. This means that any money you store in a bank becomes unsecured debt, making you an unsecured creditor who must then share the burden of bank losses should it face the prospect of insolvency. And as an unsecured creditor, you have absolutely no legal recourse. If you’re lucky enough to hold your money in a bank that doesn’t collapse in the event of a major financial crisis, then your banking institution will likely have to pay fees to help recoup the money spent in stabilizing the other banks that had failed. But do you think that banks will simply absorb these costs? No, they’re more likely to pass them on to their customers. Hence, a “bailout” once again. But this time it’s more circuitous and less evenly distributed. Another unsettling fact is that the poor and middle class will likely be the most affected by OLA’s negative impact. How so? Most of the wealthy hold a large portion of their money in equities, debt securities, precious metals, and real estate. Only the poor and middle class hold the majority of their money in checking and savings accounts. So they’re the most vulnerable. And if you are keeping your money locked away in a safety deposit box in a bank, the banking institutions also have the right to confiscate and use those funds. Retirees receiving pensions will also be affected, as pension funds are also subject to confiscation and conversion into bank equity. This means that if you’re retired, living off a pension, and holding most of your money in a checking or savings account, then you may find yourself in a truly desperate position should your bank find itself in financial dire straits..." www.theepochtimes.com/how...nking-crisis_3097779.html oh well. what did we expect#@#@# The United States Isn't a Country — It's a [[[jooish]]] Corporation!
The Act of 1871 is what changed to organic Constitution into a Constitution for the corporate UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. It also created a government for the District of Columbia. If you know who Nikolai Kondratiev was, then you know about the Kondratiev Wave and how the capitalist system operates thru the ebbs and flows of good and bad times. Kondratiev predicted the U.S. would emerge from its Great Depression, When he was shown to be right, Stalin sentenced him to hard labor. That was later changed to death. ;)
It also created a government for the District of Columbia. yup. know about the act of 1871. If you know who Nikolai Kondratiev was, then you know about the Kondratiev Wave and how the capitalist system operates thru the ebbs and flows of good and bad times. Kondratiev predicted the U.S. would emerge from its Great Depression, When he was shown to be right, Stalin sentenced him to hard labor. That was later changed to death. ;) Did not know about that.
There are no replies to Comment # 16. End Trace Mode for Comment # 16.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestIt's a little disturbing that Bidet's degenerate freakshow is backstopping $250,000+ accounts. That's not how the FDIC is supposed to work.
@MeidasTouch · Mar 11
Whoa! Here it is. The moment in 2018 when Donald Trump removed the Dodd-Frank regulations that would have prevented the Silicon Valley Bank collapse. Don’t let anyone forget this."
@MeidasTouch
Interesting. 
#7. To: Esso, Horse (#6)
Monetary Gold
21800 Oxnard Street, Suite 1120
Woodland Hills, California 91367
Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2020 10:00 AM
Subject: Wall Street’s Worst Nightmare
#8. To: Esso, Horse (#7)
September 26, 2019Updated: August 22, 2022
#12. To: AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt (#8)
It's a [[[jooish]]] Corporation!
#16. To: BTP Holdings (#12)
The Act of 1871 is what changed to organic Constitution into a Constitution for the corporate UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
Replies to Comment # 16.