When the US Government Defaulted on its Bonds


Posted originally on Dec 26, 2024 by Martin Armstrong 

4th Liberty Bond Launch Wall Street 1918

The first three Liberty bonds and the Victory Loan, sold to fund World War I, were indeed retired during the 1920s. However, because the terms of the bonds included a Ponzi Scheme that allowed the bondholder to swap them for the newer bonds, with superior terms, most of the debt from the first, second, and third Liberty bonds had been rolled over into this fourth issue. The terms of this 4th issue were as follows:

Date of Bond: October 24, 1918
Coupon Rate: 4.25%
Callable Starting: October 15, 1933
Maturity Date: October 15, 1938
Amount Originally Tendered: $6 billion
Amount Sold: $7 billion

4th Liberty Bond

The terms of this Fourth Liberty Bond specified: “The principal and interest hereof are payable in United States gold coin of the present standard of value.” This was the typical “gold clause” that was found in most sovereign bonds, both domestic and international. In addition, private contracts and bonds also included this gold clause before Roosevelt. Generally, it was intended to guarantee that bondholders would not suffer from a currency devaluation – not inflation since even a gold standard does not prevent inflation.

The US defaulted on these bonds thanks to Roosevelt. The US Treasury called in this Fourth Liberty Bond on April 15, 1934, for redemption. However, the US defaulted on this term by refusing to redeem the bond in gold. They also ignored the dollar devaluation imposed by Roosevelt, which changed the dollar’s gold value from $20.67 to $35. The entire purpose of the gold clauses prior to Roosevelt was to protect against a currency devaluation. The 21 million bondholders lost 139 million troy ounces of gold, which caused the loss in international value terms to be approximately 70% of the bond’s principal.

The legal basis for the refusal of the US Treasury to redeem in gold was the gold clause resolution was Roosevelt’s effort to seize gold, devalue the dollar, and attempt to ensure that all profits would accrue to the government (Pub. Res. 73–10), dated June 5, 1933. The Supreme Court was petitioned to decide this issue, and what we will see is that Roosevelt just ignored the Supreme Court once again, showing that the Constitution means nothing when it constructs the government from its goal.

Charles Evans Hughes Sr. April 11 1862 – August 27 1948

Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes wrote the decision in  Perry v. United States, 294 U.S. 330, 354 (1935). He made it very clear that the Joint Resolution of June 5, 1933, nullified the gold clause obligations of the United States and that they would only honor dollar for dollar, which was unconstitutional id /349. Furthermore, the Court held that Congress cannot use its power to regulate the value of money to invalidate the Government’s obligations.

FDR Gold Confiscation

President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s closure of the open gold market and the removal of the domestic backing of the dollar with gold took place with the signing of Executive Order 6102 on April 5, 1933. The Supreme Court ruled that the bondholders’ loss was unquantifiable and, therefore, repaying them in dollars according to the 1918 standard of value would be an “unjustified enrichment.” FDR essentially defaulted on the US national debt, repaying it with depreciated dollars, reducing the debt by nearly 70%.

Default is Always a Sovereign Prerogative when Things get Tight.

Russia to Pay off Ukraine’s Budget Deficit


Posted originally on Dec 23, 2024 by Martin Armstrong 

Zelensky with EU leaders

The West has funneled more money into Ukraine than the entire nation’s GDP. The nation was considered a corrupt pariah by the West who would not allow Ukraine into any bloc formed from NATO to the European Union. Now, the European Union is virtue signaling by claiming it has covered Ukraine’s budget deficit next fiscal year.

None of these nations can overcome their deficits. Of course, the funding did not come from these governments but rather from the stolen Russian funds confiscated at the beginning of the war. The next €30 billion of transferred stolen assets will allegedly pay off Ukraine’s full deficit.

EU Rebuild Ukraine with Russian Money

Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, praised the West for robbing Russia to pay Ukraine. “We know that 2025 is going to be a decisive year… we have to put Ukraine in a position of strength. Looking back, Europe has so far provided Ukraine with almost €130 billion. We have secured economic and financial stability until the end of 2025. That is good news. And with the Ukraine Facility and our G7 loan, we are even covering most of Ukraine’s financing gap for 2025. This is a major achievement,” she said.

The elites claim these funds amount to money that the Russian oligarchs stole from the Russian people, but that is simply not the case. The West has confiscated assets from a foreign nation during a time of peace as Ukraine is not in the NATO alliance. Now, the West is using those illegally confiscated assets to attack its adversary. This is complete and total economic warfare. China and others are taking note.

They stipulate this by saying they will only loan Ukraine money made on the profits of holding these assets. The risk will be shared among the G7 nations, and this risk is substantial, for Ukraine will no longer exist as a nation when this is over based on our computer models. Zelensky is too busy stuffing his pockets to care about his people or the future. He is banking on NATO invading Russia and extinguishing it as a country so he can then seize all the assets of Russia for Ukraine.

These nations are teetering on the edge by using these assets as collateral. Putin could confiscate ALL assets held by Western countries and private/public corporations under these new economic warfare tactics that completely violate international law. Zelensky has been demanding the full $300 billion in confiscated Russian assets as no sum will ever be enough for his bottomless pockets.

BlackRock.JPMorgan.UKRAINE.Reconstruction.Fund_

The G7 did not pull off an act of goodwill; rather, they opened the door for a new form of dirty economic warfare. This certainly does not mean Ukraine will stop begging for military and economic aid. Their deficit is currently being ignored. Ukraine is now in debt to the West for the trillions in loan payments. The true numbers are never calculated, but rest assured, Ukraine will be on the hook to all of its NEW debtors when the time comes. “Remember when Ukraine was a country?” will sadly be a question in the future.

US to Withhold Aid to Sierra Leone over Abortion


Posted originally on Dec 23, 2024 by Martin Armstrong 

danglecarrot

US foreign aid agency called the Millennium Challenge Corporation is threatening to withhold aid from Sierra Leone if the nation fails to legalize abortion. There is no such thing as a free lunch when it comes to politics or business. Now, $480 million in aid is on the line, all in the name of abortion. What gives the US moral grounds to tell other nations how to live?

The US organization believes that the African nation must pass the Safe Motherhood Act to permit abortions up to 14 weeks for any reason. Parliament passed the Safe Abortion Act in 2015, permitting abortions during the first 12 weeks of pregnancy. President Julius Maada Bio seems willing to expand these laws despite pushback. The Inter Religious Council of Sierra Leone (IRCSL) composed of Christians and Muslims have been opposing extending abortion laws.

“It is deeply disturbing, but not terribly surprising, that we are hearing reports that the Biden administration is threatening to withhold foreign assistance to Sierra Leone unless legislators there pass the deceptively named ‘Safe Motherhood Act’ legislation that would legalize abortion in Sierra Leone, a country that currently protects unborn life,” Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J., said in a statement first shared with The Daily Signal. Sierra Leone could certainly use the funding, and this ploy is bending the will of desperate people.

So ahead of Trump, the Biden Administration is demanding that a predominately Muslim (78.5%) country abandon its religious beliefs and cave to their demands. The issue is not abortion but that the US is threatening to withhold aid from a vulnerable nation if it does not comply. We see this happen with countless issues throughout African nations as developed nations believe they can use money to shift their societies as they see fit.

Red Pill Interview – End of Money


Posted originally on Dec 22, 2024 by Martin Armstrong 

Mel K Interview Armstrong 12-19-24


Posted originally on Dec 22, 2024 by Martin Armstrong 

Armstrong Interview: Depression, Debt, Default & Destruction in 2025


Posted originally on Dec 22, 2024 by Martin Armstrong 

House Subcommittee on Weaponization of Government Releases 17,000 Page Report Outlining The Obama/Biden Weaponization of Government


Posted originally on the CTH on December 21, 2024 | Sundance 

The House Subcommittee on the weaponization of government has issued a massive 17,000-page series of staff reports documenting the Obama/Biden weaponization of government.

While many of the findings are not going to be a surprise to CTH readers, the details and emails cited in the report are substantial.

EXAMPLE: A redacted Facebook executive spilled the beans in an email about a call with DHS, saying: “DHS cannot openly endorse the portal.”

EXAMPLE: • Alex Stamos of the Stanford Internet Observatory emailed NextDoor executives: “We already have partnerships with Facebook, Twitter, and Google, and we would love to chat with you and your team.”

The massive documentary report is broken down into four segments [Available Here].  It is going to take some time to go through all of the reports and extract the critical components.  If you would like to take a review, the four-segment links are below:

Read part one of the final staff report here.

Read part two of the final staff report here.

Read part three of the final staff report here.

Read part four of the final staff report here.

At its core, the Obama era weaponization of government was the motive for the entire Obama team selecting Joe Biden as the 2020 candidate who gave them the best option for controlling and concealing the activity they undertook during the tenure of Barack Obama.

Biden was the avatar giving the Obama control operatives time to continue covering for all their previous action.

The latter part of 2010 through 2011 was a key period in the Obama presidency.  On the cusp of a midterm election shellacking, with domestic focus on the issues around Obamacare, the Obama team and Hillary Clinton team were also intent on fueling the “Arab Spring” and the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood in Libya and Egypt.

With background research provided by the U.S. State Dept and Rivkin Project in France, a petri-dish dish experiment to see if French culture could be diluted and enhanced with “brotherhood-style” multiculturalism, Hillary and Barry then fine-tuned the mechanics.  Secretary Hillary Clinton, Samantha Power and Susan Rice quickly convinced President Obama to help leverage his Silicon Valley allies.

As a workaround to stop Hosni Mubarak and Muamar Kaddafi from controlling information flow and putting down the protests, the social media platforms of Twitter and Facebook were enlisted to assist the Brotherhood in Egypt and Libya respectively.  The U.S-designated Brotherhood partners were given support, communication and influence through Twitter and Facebook to organize their protests.

In 2011 the official merge of U.S. social media platforms to assist the U.S. State Dept foreign policy agenda was created.  In many ways this merge was the inflection point for government to begin controlling social media, Libya and Egypt were the BETA test for what would later be deployed domestically.

Seeing the success and influence of the Arab Spring experiment, in 2012 President Obama signed HR-5736, with an addition to the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013.  The Smith-Mundt Modernization Act, contained within the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2013, eased some restrictions so that media produced by the U.S. Agency for Global Media and intended for foreign audiences could be distributed domestically upon request, according to its text. Prior to its passage, the propaganda content was banned from being disseminated in America.

This move made it possible to deploy the same social media tactics domestically.  Within the Twitter Files, you will note how 2012 and 2013 are key periods when the Dept of Homeland Security began exploring their new influence partnership in social media.   For the next ten years, that partnership created various sub-set silos within the government.

DHS, FBI and Intelligence Community offices now had direct communication lines into Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, Google, WhatsAp, etc.  However, Telegram and TikTok were not around and not part of the partnership.  What two platforms have been targeted recently?… Just a coincidence, I’m sure.

The Arab Spring was the BETA test, the proving ground.  Then they went domestic with the same operation.

The results of the domestic operation, the public-private partnership, later became stunningly visible in the COVID-19 censorship operation as well as the government influence operation in the aftermath of the 2020 election.  However, most recently there has been some pushback from both originating entities; Twitter – via Elon Musk, and Facebook – via a regretful Mark Zuckerberg.

With increased scrutiny and a more awakened public seeing the consequences, it is harder for Main Justice, DHS and a weaponized intelligence community to execute their domestic propaganda operations.  Even the labeling and categorization through “mis-dis-mal-information” does not appear to be working.

Within a recent WEF discussion, Secretary Kerry outlined how freedom of speech is a ‘threat to the global democracy‘ because the governing officials have a difficult time controlling information.  Kerry goes on to posit how the next administration, he hoped at the time it would be Kamala Harris, would forcefully structure all the tools of government to stop Americans from using the first amendment to freely speak about issues.

Governing is too challenging, according to Kerry, when the government cannot stop people from seeking and discovering information that is against their interests.  Effective governing required compliant adherence to a singular ideology.

Against the backdrop of COVID-19 and a host of similarly related government narratives, if people are free to find alternative information and think for themselves, they become increasingly more difficult to control.  Yes, this is said quite openly.  This is the mindset of those in power.  WATCH: 

Mike Johnson, It’s Time To Go


Posted originally on Rumble By Bannons War Room on: Dec 20, 2024 at :7:00 pm EST

Amfest Attendees Reaction To The Vote In The House: “SHUT IT DOWN”


Posted originally on Rumble By Bannons War Room on: Dec 20, 2024 at :7:00 pm EST

Bannon: “When Does Accountability Day Start? January 20th, 2025”


Posted originally on Rumble By Bannons War Room on: Dec 20, 2024 at :7:00 pm EST