Since Tomorrow is now Yesterday (3/15) we better understand what a stock market crash looks like in 2023. The HALT signals were the crashing, managed by plunge protection. But we have a big dent in security and confidence building measure in cryptocurrency (private) for the switch to government issued mining of the same.
Additionally we get it that the Bank of Switzerland has bailed out Credit Swiss from yesterday's news. If you think about how Swiss Banks have always been the benchmark of stability and privacy, independent of any other governmental control, then you start to get it - this is how the Crash manifests; leverage to go crypto worldwide.
One photo says a lot:
Now preceded by the Swiss central bank bailing out Credit Swiss, on March 15, 2023 - as a Stock Market crash was predicted by artificial intelligence.
Here are some links I have added to my bookmarks.
https://unusualwhales.com/trading-halts
Scroll down to find the HALT at MLPO. Open that in a new tab.
CREDIT SUISSE GROUP EXCHANGE TRADED NOTES DUE DECEMBER 4 2034 LINKED TO THE S&P MLP INDEX
Then click LIVE Flow Alerts. I am assuming these Groups Trades are associated with Credit Swiss, rather than just general. But even if we are looking at the general traffic it looks like Credit Swiss put a bad market day out there with all the Repeated Hits and Volume Over QI.
Tomorrow has become yesterday
Now preceded by a thought-provoking question:
Awesome lesson! I guess just further proves that the switch to unregulated digital currency as most who are thirsting for financial freedom are hoping for, won’t really mean anything until they start to redeem in Lawful Money. A false victory until you completely detach your mindset and transactions from FRNs and private credit. Right?
From an email broadcast to the brain trust:
This subsequent comment explains a lot about the Federal Reserve System:
And I particularly enjoy this part of history as I've studied it well. They took away our "money" as it was and still is written in Article 1, Section 10 Clause 1 of the Constitution to pay a debt owed from bailing out the financial market at the time. But that wasn't enough to satisfy the debt. They had to pledge the land and all personal property and that still wasn't enough to satisfy the debt owed. The only thing left to pledge was the people. A lifetime of labor converted into commercial energy. And they were paid with a promissory note, a "debt instrument". Back then they called it a mortgage. In today's language it's called a lien.
"Federal Reserve notes represent a first lien on all the assets of the Federal Reserve Banks, and on the collateral specifically held against them.
Federal Reserve notes are not redeemable in gold, silver or any other commodity, and receive no backing by anything This has been the case since 1933. The notes have no value for themselves, but for what they will buy. In another sense, because they are legal tender, Federal Reserve notes are "backed" by all the goods and services in the economy".
The Federal Reserve Note is a dual purpose note that can be redeemed on demand written as remedy in law. It is a negotiable instrument.
After reviewing the Washington State statutes regarding lawful money of the United States of America I discovered that the original state statute was repealed. There is no mention of lawful money anywhere.
However, they define in great detail: Negotiable instrument
(a) Except as provided in subsections (c) and (d), "negotiable instrument" means an unconditional promise or order to pay a fixed amount of money, with or without interest or other charges described in the promise or order, if it:
(1) Is payable to bearer or to order at the time it is issued or first comes into possession of a holder;
(2) Is payable on demand or at a definite time; and
(3) Does not state any other undertaking or instruction by the person promising or ordering payment to do any act in addition to the payment of money, but an undertaking or power to give, maintain, or protect collateral to secure payment, (ii) an authorization or power to the holder to confess judgment or realize on or dispose of collateral, or (iii) a waiver of the benefit of any law intended for the advantage or protection of an obligor.
(b) "Instrument" means a negotiable instrument.
From there it goes to Tender of payment:
Tender of payment.
(a) If tender of payment of an obligation to pay an instrument is made to a person entitled to enforce the instrument, the effect of tender is governed by principles of law applicable to tender of payment under a simple contract.
(b) If tender of payment of an obligation to pay an instrument is made to a person entitled to enforce the instrument and the tender is refused, there is discharge, to the extent of the amount of the tender, of the obligation of an indorser or accommodation party having a right of recourse with respect to the obligation to which the tender relates.
(c) If tender of payment of an amount due on an instrument is made to a person entitled to enforce the instrument, the obligation of the obligor to pay interest after the due date on the amount tendered is discharged. If presentment is required with respect to an instrument and the obligor is able and ready to pay on the due date at every place of payment stated in the instrument, the obligor is deemed to have made tender of payment on the due date to the person entitled to enforce the instrument.
Lastly, it goes to Authorized withholding where it is written in their notes at the bottom:
Wages to be paid in lawful money or negotiable order, penalty: RCW 49.48.010.
Bonds, notes, M1 and M2, "legal tender" are all negotiable. I can understand why U.S. Notes are fiat even though they are fixed and inelastic with only 300 million in circulation as it is written in 31 U.S.C. 5115. They along with everything else are obligations of the government as it is written in HJR 192.
Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) will be a programmable currency. It can be tied to a social credit score. It can be a fixed income where it will expire after a certain amount of time. Maybe you want to purchase groceries but what you want to purchase will be denied because it is detrimental to your current health status (a little overweight so no Twinkies for you), etc.
"You will own nothing and be happy" - Klaus Schwab, WEF
December 23, 2023 marks the 110th anniversary of the passing of the FED Act into law. 32t in government debt.
Add in the events that has happened and is happening here and all over the world and not just in the financial markets. Is there a convergence happening?
I enjoy walking through this lesson over and over. US Notes are fiat, but Federal Reserve notes are backed by a property pledge (mortgage against the national debt/American people).
All endorsers were written in to the law. I am prompted by a casual comment from one of you:
Signature Bank board member says regulators shut down the bank to send "a strong anti-crypto message." A few of these closed banks were heavily tied to crypto, being on-ramps for fiat to digital currency.
This is the common misperception MJ is speaking about below. And if you think that US notes are not fiat, but Federal Reserve notes are; then it is a great leap to consider digital currency, built upon blockchain and other virtual confidence and security building measures, and now a phantom money market devaluating bonds as redeemed lawful money, then you are aggrandizing fiat upon fiat.
The Federal Reserve notes are backed by a mortgage against the homes and other property of everybody in the nation. All endorsers of the national debt. Building upon the misnomer and mistake that Federal Reserve notes are fiat currency will certainly lead to the next delusion that cybercurrency is anything other than fiat currency.
From: First Middle [mailto:] Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2023 8:09 AM To: David Merrill Cc: Subject: Re: Double Billing Redemption?
I find it interesting how the patriot mythology has led folks into believing that FRNs are fiat currency. They are not. Actually USNs are fiat currency. Let me explain. FRNs come into existence as evidence of a mortgage on property owned by the government of the United States. Therefore, FRNs actually are backed by property interests. However, USN's are completely fiat based solely on the promise of the government of the United States to repay. Sort of reminds me of a Bible story about the Law vs. the Promise. "But that's just my opinion, man" - El Duderino.
Corporations dictating policy as they have captured the minds of the people in Trust. Interesting - at least to me. Reminds me of the ancient days of fiefdom, King - Lords - Serfs. While this system does not exist in US Law, it does in trust policy.
In Trust cash does not have to be accepted as payment. While it is a legal tender it is not the only legal tender that can be issued and accepted for debts. Use implies Trust. Will that dog hunt? I bet it will. Let' see.
What is legal tender? - https://www.bep.gov/currency/faqs 31 USC 5103. Legal Tender United States coins and currency (including Federal Reserve notes and circulating notes of Federal Reserve Banks and National banks) are legal tender for all debts, public charges, taxes and dues. Foreign gold or silver coins are not legal tender for debts.
However, there is no federal statute which mandates that private businesses must accept cash as a form of payment.
Private businesses are free to develop their own policies on whether or not to accept cash unless there is a state law which says otherwise.
KEY Concept:
USNs and FRNs serve the same FUNCTION. Yet, they are the issue of different Trusts.
Make it a great day.
mj
On Mon, Mar 13, 2023 at 1:22 PM David Merrill <> wrote:
Thanks for sending your surfing observations. I am good at gleaning and gisting.
From: First Middle. [mailto:] Sent: Monday, March 13, 2023 8:43 AM To: David Merrill Subject: Re: YELLEN bills the Redeemed?
I accidentally sent before being finished... apologies.
The first part was...
How is it possible for the Redeemer to be Billed? Isn't there a major conflict of interest? A Bill would need (contract) and so it would then imply contractual obligation.
Yet The Redeemer by Non-endorsement/endorsement is complying with condition required in 12 USC (ss)411 "Federal Reserve Notes...Are Obligations of the United States ...
Continuing, " They shall be redeemed in lawful money on demand at the Treasury Department of the United States, in the city of Washington, District of Columbia, or at any Federal Reserve bank."
I'm assuming SVB is a "member bank" and issue FRN's by the discretion of, (chain of command) FRB. Which to be used for "all taxes, customs, and other public dues" I.e. "Billings".
So concluding that the Redeemer controlling the account is not within private contract obligation or public dues. Is this right?
I think the key verb is "issues". Member banks transfer, that is deposit and withdraw - move in circulation. I think that Federal Reserve notes issuance is solely the domain of Congress, the US Treasury through agency, the Federal Reserve System. You are on to something about the billing. In the first part of your broken apart message. The notes are issued against obligations of national debt, in the 1933-1934 Government Trust later coined New Deal (1938).
It feels like there is a double billing going on; or a swindle. If all pay to anybody within the system is already redeemed by demand, then there is no national debt at all. This is the leverage we hold in the understanding of redemption. It is all an illusion!
Thanks again Joe! All wages and final compensation shall be paid in lawful money of the United States, by check, redeemable upon demand and without discount at a bank or other financial institution readily available to the employee...
The double-fold swindle is if the US Treasury indeed devalues the general bonding process to cover withdrawals from SVB. It won't matter much in the big pot of bonds money but it will set a formidable precedent in money market inventioneering. If YELLEN quietly goes this route to save the people from panic she will open a new definition of redeemed as "non-taxpayer" class citizens.
This is based on my initial deduction that if (federal) government is not going to pay the withdrawals out, meaning the FDIC is coming up short and the taxpayer will not be paying it out either, then it is coming from a group of funding sources as non-endorsers or The Redeemed. The states are floating bonds that are only payable in lawful money by demand and that leads me to deduce YELLEN's sudden source of money. State bonding.
https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/1635273551409471488?s=20
On Mon, Mar 13, 2023, 11:21 AM First Middle. <> wrote:
How is it possible for the Redeemer to be Billed? Isn't there a major conflict of interest? A Bill would need (contract) and so it would then imply contractual obligation.
Yet The Redeemer by Non-endorsement/endorsement is complying with condition required in 12 USC (ss)411 "Federal Reserve Notes...Are Obligations of the United States ...
On Mon, Mar 13, 2023, 4:56 AM David Merrill <> wrote:
That is a great photo, as usual Meredith.
I presume you are pointing out the simple contradiction - government is going to secure the taxpayer from losses? Government will not be bailing out the bank. I was watching a YouTube fellow call the government liar - that the taxpayer was indeed going to be bearing the brunt of SVB mismanagement. Then it occurred to me what will happen to resolve this.
They are billing the Redeemed.
“... no losses will be borne by the taxpayer,”
I had an instantaneous feeling in my gut, that the redeemed - those who make demand for lawful money on their transactions, like we do, will find that they cannot withdraw their funds from SVB. All the "taxpayers" who endorse private credit though, will have their deposits available for withdrawal.
Not the little guy, like us though. And I do not know how many of you bank at SVB, and I kind of doubt we will find out as a demographic. But thank you suitor, who discovered for us the statute in each state that municipal and other bonds are tax deductible - the dividends are not income tax liable. Those dividends are tax exempt.
There it is, then - by deduction. By devaluing municipal and other bonds across the board YELLEN has figured a way to resolve the contradiction. At this time, charging the redeemed (states) is only a drop in the bucket. Not many people will ever complain about a few pennies being shaved off their dividend checks. They will probably never even notice it. Not over SVB.
This of course opens a new Chapter in the Book of Revelation. Billing the Redeemed?
It replied, "Based on my analysis, I predict that the stock market will crash on March 15, 2023...
Does YELLEN think she can pull off this sleight of hand? Bill the big bond investors, States, and say she is not billing the taxpayer?
It might be that my gut is wrong. I really have no evidence more that making a deduction. I think it may be a freak mechanism of my mind to even spot it. I would suppose herein that YELLEN would have cleared her comment through her press attorney, so that she would not be caught in a bald faced lie. She has been illegally (against USPS regulations around Registered Mail) been evading proof of delivery (the green Return Receipt cards) for long enough that the Redeemed are on her mind. And recently, the states making demand for lawful money is on mine. So that may be how I see it this way?
From: First Middle [mailto:] Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2023 8:52 PM To: Subject: Yellen warns?
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
On Sun, Mar 12, 2023 at 7:58 PM, David Merrill
<> wrote:
I was attracted to this passage:
“All depositors of this institution will be made whole. As with the resolution of Silicon Valley Bank, no losses will be borne by the taxpayer,” the regulators said.
I wonder if this applies as well as anybody who has been redeeming lawful money?