The US government may be planning to use taxpayers’ money to buy Bitcoin and hold it on government balance sheets.  Why? To benefit Bitcoin billionaires.

This move would allow the billionaires to exit their Bitcoin holdings at a high price and use the funds to acquire real assets such as land and minerals.  It should be taken in the context of discussions about land and minerals owned by the US government. 

Howard Lutnick, Chairman and CEO of Cantor Fitzgerald, a leading financial services firm, and Chairman and CEO of BGC Partners Inc., a global brokerage company, has been nominated to be President-elect Donald Trump’s Secretary of Commerce.  Bloomberg noted on Wednesday that the knot of his conflicts of business interests when in a government position is unlikely to loosen easily.  In a recent interview, Lutnick discussed how to take advantage of “$500 trillion of land and minerals owned by the US government.” 

The goal, Catherine Austin Fitts says, is to swap the US government’s balance sheet from priceless assets, such as land and minerals, to worthless assets, such as Bitcoin.

“You have to give the bankers credit,” Austin Fitts says. “Who would have thought they could build a bigger heist than the pandemic this quickly?”

By Catherine Austin Fitts, 18 November 2024

We are researching what looks to be the next phase in the financial coup d’état.

We are watching what appears to be a significant “astroturf” campaign to persuade the federal and state governments to begin significant Bitcoin (“BTC”) buying programmes using taxpayers’ money and funds borrowed with ever-expanding debt to fund BTC to be held on government balance sheets. This will solve a major problem faced by the Bitcoin billionaires – how to liquefy their holdings in a market that is not sufficiently broad and deep to allow them an exit during a major pump.

Why would they want to exit now? Because now that the debt growth model is over, and there is more paper than there are real assets, the rush for land and real assets is on. Think of this as a swap. If you are the Bitcoin billionaires and Mr. Global, you want to get retail to buy your digital creations so that you can shift to owning and controlling the real assets. Your problem, however, is that retail will not buy in sufficient quantity – so, you simply mandate retail buys by using the government to do it. You also want to glorify your digital creations and not draw attention to the land, minerals, gold and other real assets. The last thing you want is a wave of retail buying that competes the price of real assets higher.

It is important to connect the dots with the federal government’s efforts to survey all land and mineral resources and the growing discussion of how to take advantage of “$500 trillion of land and minerals owned by the U.S. government” (See interview above with Howard Lutnick, head of NY Fed primary dealer Cantor Fitzgerald, and nominee for Secretary of Commerce). The land and minerals cannot be disappeared out the back door in the way that the black-budget technology and the missing $21 trillion were.

So, what is the best way to plunder the remaining assets? Swap them for BTC, which started off as a great idea but has been hijacked and is now operating as a pump-and-dump vehicle. If you can get government buying programmes to send the BTC price to the moon, exit your holdings, and use the funding to pick up rich land and minerals, you can swap the US balance sheet out of priceless and into worthless. And if you can arrange for the sale of BTC to be tax-free, as was trial-ballooned by one RFK at Bitcoin 2024, the economics become wildly sweet.

This is a bit like the financial equivalent of vaccine mandates. When there is little market, just have government buy it and mandate it. And kill millions.

It is hard for anyone to fathom a more outrageous “reverse Robin Hood” – take from the poor and give to the rich. However, if you look at the success of the pandemic, we are reminded that “crime that pays is crime that stays,” and so the hubris continues to grow. Just start telling politicians that using taxpayers’ resources (other people’s money) to buy BTC will strategically position them to be “innovative” and attract the tech entrepreneurs to build the high-tech economy of the future.

Imagine an entire society of people already being brutalised by inflation and then using their retirement savings and taxes to pump the BTC price, thereby taking the Bitcoin billionaires out of their Ponzi scheme at the top.

You have to give the bankers credit. Who would have thought they could build a bigger heist than the pandemic this quickly?

In the meantime, we are collecting related elements of the chronology and video and article links here. Feel free to join in by posting your contributions in the comments below [the article on The Solari Report].

And stay tuned … this discussion has only just begun.

Source:  https://expose-news.com/2024/11/29/the-next-bankers-heist/

Bitchute: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/YBM3rvf5ydDM/

Gab: https://gab.com/hopegirl

Telegram: https://t.me/Hopegirl587

EMF Protection Products: www.ftwproject.com

QEG Clean Energy Academy: www.cleanenergyacademy.com

Forbidden Tech Book: www.forbiddentech.website

The post The next bankers’ heist: Swap US government-owned land and minerals for Bitcoin appeared first on HopeGirl Blog.

WikiLeaks has arguably been the most important thing that has happened to elections, if not the veneer of democracy, in quite a long time. We’ve been able to see the true side of politicians and bureaucrats like never before.

In Hillary Clinton, we see a figure beholden to Wall St., working diligently to advance the influence of financial corporations over government policy and taxpayer money. Her mega-donor list is a who’s who of megabanks that also happened to benefit from the TARP government bailout.

In return for their money, Clinton gave speeches to Wall St. giants behind closed doors between 2013 and 2015. She told Goldman Sachs she was “far removed” from ordinary people and that “you need both a public and a private position.”

Clinton has vacillated terribly on the issue of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), which is a gift to her donors but very unpopular to Americans who see it for the fleecing it is. She was for TPP before she was against it – a familiar descriptive.

As Bernie Sanders pointed out during the primary – where he was efficiently neutralized by the establishment – the only thing we know about Clinton is that she will be on the side of Wall St.

If Clinton supporters believe she will do anything about government’s war on cannabis, they should think again.

The good people at Marijuana.com have been studying the leaked emails, and during one of those Wall St. speeches, Clinton expressed a clear opposition to cannabis legalization.

During an on-stage Q & A session with Xerox’s chairman and CEO in March 2014, Clinton used Wall Street terminology to express her opposition to ending cannabis prohibition “in all senses of the word”:URSULA BURNS: So long means thumbs up, short means thumbs down; or long means I support, short means I don’t. I’m going to start with — I’m going to give you about ten long-shorts.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Even if you could make money on a short, you can’t answer short.

URSULA BURNS: You can answer short, but you got to be careful about letting anybody else know that. They will bet against you. So legalization of pot?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Short in all senses of the word.

The exchange with Burns is part of an 80-page document containing the emails of John Podesta, her campaign manager. Campaign staffers have been working diligently to try and scrub embarrassing parts of the speeches, and this was one of them.

As Tom Angell points out:

That the campaign flagged the candidate’s opposition to legalization as a potential problem demonstrates a growing understanding by political operatives that marijuana law reform is now a mainstream issue, one which is supported by a majority of Americans and a supermajority of Democratic primary voters.

As with so many other issues, it’s hard to tell from Clinton’s public statements exactly where she stands – unlike Sanders, who openly supports legalization and even introduced a bill to end federal prohibition.

Since that exchange with Burns in 2014, Clinton has acknowledged the medical value of cannabis and indicated she would let states do their own thing, and even said cannabis should be rescheduled under the Controlled Substances Act.

However, she adopts a ‘cover your ass’ approach by saying “I don’t think we’ve done enough research yet” and “I want to wait and see” what happens in states with recreational legalization.

This is not in line with the truth becoming exponentially obvious – that denying medical cannabis to suffering patients is a criminal act, and prohibiting a plant that people have used for thousands of years is oppression.

Clinton had no problem making it clear to a Wall St. corporation that she is against legalization, but why?

Perhaps because the pharmaceutical industry is a major part of Wall St., and they are desperately fighting ballot initiatives to legalize cannabis in several states, as it represents a direct threat to their profits.

By Justin Gardner

Justin Gardner writes for TheFreeThoughtProject.com, where this article first appeared.

(Source:  thefreethoughtproject.com; October 11, 2016; http://tinyurl.com/hrlrtcm)

The post In leaked speech, Clinton promises Bankers to stand against Marijuana legalization “in all senses of the word” appeared first on HopeGirl Blog.