Maduro And His Wife Indicted In US Federal Court; To "Finally... Face Justice For His Crimes"

Authored by T.J.Muscaro via The Epoch Times,

Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, were indicted in the Southern District of New York, U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi announced early on Jan. 3.

“Nicolás Maduro has been charged with Narco-Terrorism Conspiracy, Cocaine Importation Conspiracy, Possession of Machineguns and Destructive Devices, and Conspiracy to Possess Machineguns and Destructive Devices against the United States,” Bondi said on X.

“They will soon face the full wrath of American justice on American soil in American courts.”

Bondi issued the statement hours after Maduro and Flores were captured and extracted by U.S. armed forces in Caracas in the early hours of Jan. 3.

“On behalf of the entire U.S. DOJ, I would like to thank President [Donald] Trump for having the courage to demand accountability on behalf of the American People, and a huge thank you to our brave military who conducted the incredible and highly successful mission to capture these two alleged international narco traffickers.”

Bondi’s announcement follows statements made by Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) who said he was told by Secretary of State Marco Rubio that the strike on Venezuela’s capital was a means to protect law enforcement as they carried out an arrest warrant for Maduro.

Lee added that Rubio also told him that Maduro was “arrested by U.S. personnel to stand trial on criminal charges in the United States.”

Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau also emphasized that Maduro was expected to face legal action.

“The tyrant is gone,” Landau said on social media.

“He will now—finally—face justice for his crimes.”

In 2020, Maduro and 14 other Venezuelan officials were charged with narco-terrorism, corruption, drug trafficking and other charges in New York City, Miami, and Washington, D.C.

“The scope and magnitude of the drug trafficking alleged was made possible only because Maduro and others corrupted the institutions of Venezuela and provided political and military protection for the rampant narco-terrorism crimes described in our charges,” U.S. Attorney Geoffrey S. Berman said in the 2020 press release.

“As alleged, Maduro and the other defendants expressly intended to flood the United States with cocaine in order to undermine the health and wellbeing of our nation. Maduro very deliberately deployed cocaine as a weapon.”

The Epoch Times reached out to the Department of Justice to clarify whether Bondi was referring to this 2020 indictment or not.

As Jonathan Turley reports, this operation will be justified as executing the criminal warrant and responding to an international drug cartel, a very similar legal framework to the one used against Noriega in 1989. There is precedent supporting that earlier operation, which will now be used to defend the actions in Venezuela.

Here is part of the earlier description from the Justice Department of the indicted conduct:

“Maduro helped manage and ultimately lead the Cartel of the Suns, a Venezuelan drug-trafficking organization comprised of high-ranking Venezuelan officials. As he gained power in Venezuela, Maduro participated in a corrupt and violent narco-terrorism conspiracy with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization.  Maduro negotiated multi-ton shipments of FARC-produced cocaine; directed the Cartel of the Suns to provide military-grade weapons to the FARC; coordinated with narcotics traffickers in Honduras and other countries to facilitate large-scale drug trafficking; and solicited assistance from FARC leadership in training an unsanctioned militia group that functioned, in essence, as an armed forces unit for the Cartel of the Suns. In March 2020, Maduro was charged in the Southern District of New York for narco-terrorism, conspiracy to import cocaine, possession of machine guns and destructive devices, and conspiracy to possess machine guns and destructive devices.”

Ordinarily, the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations and other international agreements require the United States to notify the embassy of a foreign national arrested and held in the United States. Notice seems a tad superfluous in this case.

In his appeal, Noriega argued that his arrest violated international law under the head-of-state immunity doctrine.  The district court rejected Noriega’s head-of-state immunity claim because the United States government never recognized Noriega as Panama’s legitimate ruler — an argument that will be made in the Maduro prosecution.

The United States for the Eleventh Circuit also rejected the immunity claim.

Noriega also argued that his capture violated the Treaty Providing for the Extradition of Criminals, May 25, 1904, United States of America-Republic of Panama, 34 Stat. 2851 (“U.S.-Panama Extradition Treaty”). The Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Alvarez-Machain, 504 U.S. 655 (1992), however, was found to bar this argument. The issue was whether he was abducted to the United States with a superseding extradition treaty. The Eleventh Circuit held:

The article of the U.S.-Panama Extradition Treaty upon which Noriega relies for his extradition treaty claim contains almost the same language as the provision of the U.S.-Mexico Extradition Treaty at issue in Alvarez-Machain. See U.S.-Panama Extradition Treaty, art. 5 (“Neither of the contracting parties shall be bound to deliver up its own citizen or subject ․”)…

Under Alvarez-Machain, to prevail on an extradition treaty claim, a defendant must demonstrate, by reference to the express language of a treaty and/or the established practice thereunder, that the United States affirmatively agreed not to seize foreign nationals from the territory of its treaty partner. Noriega has not carried this burden, and therefore, his claim fails.

The Noriega case offers ample support for the Trump Administration, which has had an outstanding arrest warrant for over five years. He is not viewed as the duly elected leader of Venezuela and has been tied to a criminal drug cartel.

Tyler Durden Sat, 01/03/2026 - 10:30



 

 

This week, I speak with Stephanie Drescher, Apollo’s Chief Client and Product Development Officer and a member of the Firm’s Leadership Team. We discuss her start at JP Morgan, and why creating company culture is so crucial. We also discussed how Apollo manages performance and balance sheets.

The increased interest in private markets for investor portfolios, and how and investment decisions get made are a crucial part of our conversation.

Her current reading list is here; A transcript of our conversation is available here Monday.

You can stream and download our full conversation, including any podcast extras, on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, and Bloomberg. All of our earlier podcasts on your favorite pod hosts can be found here.

Be sure to check out our Masters in Business next week with Nobel laureate Richard Thaler and his University of Chicago Booth School colleague Alex Imas on the update and reissue of his classic book The Winner’s Curse.

 

 

Current Reading

 

 

 

 

The post MiB: Stephanie Drescher, Apollo Chief Client and Product Development Officer appeared first on The Big Picture.

America's Low-Wage Workers Aren't All High-School Dropouts

Despite a strong labor market and rising nominal wages, there are still millions of people taking home less than $20 per hour on average.

Education plays a major role in determining earnings, but it does not guarantee high wages—or even employment.

This chart, via Visual Capitalist's Niccolo Conte, shows the share and number of U.S. low-wage workers earning less than $20 per hour by education level, using data from the Economic Policy Institute as of July 2025.

Low-Wage Work Is Concentrated Among Less-Educated Workers

Workers without a high school diploma face the greatest exposure to low wages. Roughly two-thirds of this group—about 6.9 million people—earn less than $20 per hour, reflecting limited access to higher-paying occupations and fewer opportunities for advancement.

The table below breaks down low-wage workers by education level:

Among workers whose highest education is a high school diploma, 43% earn under $20 per hour. This group represents the largest number of low-wage workers overall, totaling nearly 15.9 million people.

Even some college education offers only partial protection. More than one-third of workers with some college (but no completed degree) earn below the $20 threshold, amounting to 12.9 million workers.

College Degrees Don’t Eliminate Low Wages

Higher education significantly lowers the likelihood of earning under $20 per hour, but it does not eliminate it. About 12% of workers with a college or advanced degree, roughly 7.2 million people, still fall below this pay level.

Overall, while education remains one of the strongest determinants of earnings, income outcomes depend on various factors, including industry mix, regional costs of living, and labor market conditions.

If you found this interesting, explore more labor market and income visuals on Voronoi, including U.S. States With the Most Low-Wage Workers.

Tyler Durden Sat, 01/03/2026 - 09:55

How Global Economic Power Has Shifted Over The Past 45 Years

Over the past four decades, the global economic hierarchy has undergone profound change.

Some economies have grown steadily, others have surged, and a few have slipped down the rankings as new players emerged.

In the following visualization, Visual Capitalist's Niccolo Conte charts the world’s top economies from 1980 to 2025.

The data for this visualization comes from the IMF’s World Economic Outlook (October 2025). GDP figures are measured in current U.S. dollars and are not adjusted for inflation.

The United States Remains on Top

Since 1980, the United States has consistently ranked as the world’s largest economy. Its GDP rose from about $2.9 trillion in 1980 to more than $30.6 trillion by 2025. While its global share has fluctuated, the U.S. has maintained its lead due to a large domestic market, deep capital markets, and sustained productivity growth.

China represents the most dramatic structural change in the global economy over the past 45 years.

In 1980, it ranked outside the top five, with GDP just over $300 billion. By 2010, China had already surpassed Germany and Japan, and by 2025 it stands firmly as the world’s second-largest economy at nearly $19.4 trillion.

Japan dominated the global economy in the late 1980s and early 1990s, briefly narrowing the gap with the United States. However, slower growth and demographic headwinds caused it to lose ground, falling to fourth place by 2025.

Europe’s largest economies—Germany, the United Kingdom, and France—have remained among the top 10.

Emerging Markets Gain Ground

Beyond China, several emerging economies climbed into the top ranks. India’s GDP expanded from under $200 billion in 1980 to more than $4.1 trillion in 2025, placing it among the world’s five largest economies.

Outside of the top 10, countries such as Brazil, Mexico, Indonesia, and Türkiye have also moved up the rankings, reflecting faster growth than many advanced economies over the long run.

If you enjoyed today’s post, check out Global GDP Growth Projections in 2025 on Voronoi, the new app from Visual Capitalist.

Tyler Durden Sat, 01/03/2026 - 08:45

Germany's Family Businesses Warn: Taxes, Energy Costs, And Bureaucracy Are Killing Competitiveness

Submitted by Thomas Kolbe

At the turn of the year, the Foundation for Family Businesses, together with the ifo Institute, presented a corporate survey on tax policy and location attractiveness. The result is unequivocal: Germany is too expensive and no longer competitive as a business location.

There is nothing new under the sun. In their year-end Annual Monitor, the Foundation for Family Businesses and the ifo Institute once again went straight to the heart of the matter. A total of 1,705 companies across all sectors and size categories were surveyed on their assessment of current tax policy and Germany’s attractiveness as a business location. The evaluation of this corporate panel—1,358 of which were traditional family-owned businesses—turned out to be devastating, as expected.

Overburdened Labor Factor

More than 80 percent of companies perceive the overall tax and contribution burden—particularly in the area of personnel costs, i.e., wage taxes and social security contributions—as far too high. The heavy burden on the employee side is especially criticized by smaller family-owned businesses. It has become increasingly difficult to grant wage increases when the fiscal authorities take the lion’s share and key performers are bled ever more heavily with each pay raise due to the continuous increase in social security contribution ceilings.

This assessment is shared by Professor Rainer Kirchdörfer, member of the Foundation’s executive board, who comments on the study:
“Our new Annual Monitor shows just how much employers and employees are pulling in the same direction. It is precisely the high taxes on labor that paralyze both sides and drain the joy from performance. High-tax Germany has also lost ground here.”

Two-thirds of surveyed executives complain about excessive income tax rates. Income tax is particularly relevant for partnerships—and by international standards it is clearly too high. A recurring grievance is also the complexity of Germany’s tax system. The familiar quip holds that roughly two-thirds of global tax law literature originates in the Federal Republic. Even if exaggerated, the message is clear: Germany is a bureaucrat’s paradise.

Currently, 5.4 million people work in the public sector—around half a million more than five years ago. This despite technological progress, artificial intelligence, and increasing automation of internal processes.

The Bureaucracy Reduction Classic

A tangible reduction in bureaucracy, including tax law, has been overdue for decades. Yet no federal government dares to tackle this hot potato. German bureaucracy has grown too powerful, evolving at all levels into a state within the state. At the same time, policymakers view the public sector as a kind of buffer for a labor market that has slowly but steadily tipped.

As a reminder: over the past three years, German companies have been forced to create 325,000 additional jobs merely to cope with the ever-expanding bureaucratic workload. The state is effectively outsourcing its ballooning documentation, archiving, and compliance requirements to the private sector.

Ranked second and third among entrepreneurs’ main points of criticism are rising local business taxes (Gewerbesteuer) and energy-related levies. Both factors are likely to play a significant role in 2026. Municipal budgets, paralyzed by a cumulative deficit of €35 billion last year, are virtually screaming for sharp increases in local business tax rates.

This threatens to trigger a tax-driven recessionary spiral initiated by local governments seeking short-term relief—particularly in regions hard hit by the industrial downturn, such as the automotive hubs of Stuttgart, Ingolstadt, and Wolfsburg.

Additional Pressure from Energy Levies

As of January 1, 2026, under the Fuel Emissions Trading Act (BEHG), the CO₂ price corridor will rise to between €55 and €65 per ton. This represents another substantial erosion of Germany’s economic substance, as it struggles to keep energy-intensive production in the country amid intensifying competition with China and the United States.

Entrepreneurs’ demands are clear: a reduction in the electricity tax is long overdue as a first step toward restoring the competitiveness of German industry. The abolition of the solidarity surcharge, alongside an accelerated reduction in corporate taxes, also ranks high on the business community’s wish list for the coming year.

Germany is too expensive as a business location by OECD standards. Since 2018, this has also become evident in overall economic productivity, which has stagnated and even declined slightly in recent quarters.

Valid Criticism, But the Root Problem Remains Untouched

There is no question that entrepreneurs are correct in their assessment of fiscal overburdening on companies and private households. The German state has expanded excessively and—given steadily rising public debt—is increasingly living at the expense of future generations.

What is striking, however, is what the study fails to address. Neither the billion-euro follow-up costs of migration into Germany’s welfare system nor the fiscal and real-economic consequences of centrally planned climate policy are included in the assessment. Yet both factors significantly contribute to rising tax burdens and have sustainably weakened Germany’s industrial base.

What has materialized in energy costs—burdens sometimes three times higher than those in competing locations such as France or the United States—must become the subject of a broad public debate if a return to rational economic policy is ever to be possible.

Under the current federal government led by Chancellor Friedrich Merz, this appears fundamentally out of reach.

If not Germany’s economic middle class, who should initiate such a debate openly and courageously? We are still waiting for the icebreaker capable of overcoming the dogma of the alleged lack of alternatives in climate policy in a practical, rational, and unresentful manner. And it remains all too easy for policymakers, operating in an entrenched mode of accelerated debt accumulation, to align incentive structures and a lavishly funded subsidy machine in such a way that any critical voice from the business sector is ultimately silenced.

In the end, the study delivers a rapid situational assessment from which the familiar criticism emerges—criticism that, at all costs, seeks to avoid a collision with an ideologically hardened climate-socialist policy.

Tyler Durden Sat, 01/03/2026 - 07:00

Peter Schiff: Printing Money Is Not the Cure for Cononavirus



In his most recent podcast, Peter Schiff talked about coronavirus and the impact that it is having on the markets. Earlier this month, Peter said he thought the virus was just an excuse for stock market woes. At the time he believed the market was poised to fall anyway. But as it turns out, coronavirus has actually helped the US stock market because it has led central banks to pump even more liquidity into the world financial system. All this means more liquidity — central banks easing. In fact, that is exactly what has already happened, except the new easing is taking place, for now, outside the United States, particularly in China.” Although the new money is primarily being created in China, it is flowing into dollars — the dollar index is up — and into US stocks. Last week, US stock markets once again made all-time record highs. In fact, I think but for the coronavirus, the US stock market would still be selling off. But because of the central bank stimulus that has been the result of fears over the coronavirus, that actually benefitted not only the US dollar, but the US stock market.” In the midst of all this, Peter raises a really good question. The primary economic concern is that coronavirus will slow down output and ultimately stunt economic growth. Practically speaking, the world would produce less stuff. If the virus continues to spread, there would be fewer goods and services produced in a market that is hunkered down. Why would the Federal Reserve respond, or why would any central bank respond to that by printing money? How does printing more money solve that problem? It doesn’t. In fact, it actually exacerbates it. But you know, everybody looks at central bankers as if they’ve got the solution to every problem. They don’t. They don’t have the magic wand. They just have a printing press. And all that creates is inflation.” Sometimes the illusion inflation creates can look like a magic wand. Printing money can paper over problems. But none of this is going to fundamentally fix the economy. In fact, if central bankers were really going to do the right thing, the appropriate response would be to drain liquidity from the markets, not supply even more.” Peter explained how the Fed was originally intended to create an “elastic” money supply that would expand or contract along with economic output. Today, the money supply only goes in one direction — that’s up. The economy is strong, print money. The economy is weak, print even more money.” Of course, the asset that’s doing the best right now is gold. The yellow metal pushed above $1,600 yesterday. Gold is up 5.5% on the year in dollar terms and has set record highs in other currencies. Because gold is rising even in an environment where the dollar is strengthening against other fiat currencies, that shows you that there is an underlying weakness in the dollar that is right now not being reflected in the Forex markets, but is being reflected in the gold markets. Because after all, why are people buying gold more aggressively than they’re buying dollars or more aggressively than they’re buying US Treasuries? Because they know that things are not as good for the dollar or the US economy as everybody likes to believe. So, more people are seeking out refuge in a better safe-haven and that is gold.” Peter also talked about the debate between Trump and Obama over who gets credit for the booming economy – which of course, is not booming.

We are living in crazy times. I have a hard time believing that most of the general public is not awake, but in reality, they are. We've never seen anything like this; I mean not even under Obama during the worst part of the Great Recession." Now the Fed is desperately trying to keep interest rates from rising. The problem is that it's a much bigger debt bubble this time around , and the Fed is going to have to blow a lot more air into it to keep it inflated. The difference is this time it's not going to work." It looks like the Fed did another $104.15 billion of Not Q.E. in a single day. The Fed claims it's only temporary. But that is precisely what Bernanke claimed when the Fed started QE1. Milton Freedman once said, "Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program." The same applies to Q.E., or whatever the Fed wants to pretend it's doing. Except this is not QE4, according to Powell. Right. Pumping so much money out, and they are accusing China of currency manipulation ? Wow! Seriously! Amazing! Dump the U.S. dollar while you still have a chance. Welcome to The Atlantis Report. And it is even worse than that, In addition to the $104.15 billion of "Not Q.E." this past Thursday; the FED added another $56.65 billion in liquidity to financial markets the next day on Friday. That's $160.8 billion in two days!!!! in just 48 hours. That is more than 2 TIMES the highest amount the FED has ever injected on a monthly basis under a Q.E. program (which was $80 billion per month) Since this isn't QE....it will be really scary on what they are going to call Q.E. Will it twice, three times, four times, five times what this injection per month ! It is going to be explosive since it takes about 60 to 90 days for prices to react to this, January should see significant inflation as prices soak up the excess liquidity. The question is, where will the inflation occur first . The spike in the repo rate might have a technical explanation: a misjudgment was made in the Fed's money market operations. Even so, two conclusions can be drawn: managing the money markets is becoming harder, and from now on, banks will be studying each other's creditworthiness to a greater degree than before. Those people, who struggle with the minutiae of money markets, and that includes most professionals, should focus on the causes and not the symptoms. Financial markets have recovered from each downturn since 1980 because interest rates have been cut to new lows. Post-2008, they were cut to near zero or below zero in all major economies. In response to a new financial crisis, they cannot go any lower. Central banks will look for new ways to replicate or broaden Q.E. (At some point, governments will simply see repression as an easier option). Then there is the problem of 'risk-free' assets becoming risky assets. Financial markets assume that the probability of major governments such as the U.S. or U.K. defaulting is zero. These governments are entering the next downturn with debt roughly twice the levels proportionate to GDP that was seen in 2008. The belief that the policy worked was completely predicated on the fact that it was temporary and that it was reversible, that the Fed was going to be able to normalize interest rates and shrink its balance sheet back down to pre-crisis levels. Well, when the balance sheet is five-trillion, six-trillion, seven-trillion when we're back at zero, when we're back in a recession, nobody is going to believe it is temporary. Nobody is going to believe that the Fed has this under control, that they can reverse this policy. And the dollar is going to crash. And when the dollar crashes, it's going to take the bond market with it, and we're going to have stagflation. We're going to have a deep recession with rising interest rates, and this whole thing is going to come imploding down. everything is temporary with the fed including remaining off the gold standard temporary in the Fed's eyes could mean at least 50 years This liquidity problem is a signal that trading desks are loaded up on inventory and can't get rid of it. Repo is done out of a need for cash. If you own all of your securities (i.e., a long-only, no leverage mutual fund) you have no need to "repo" your securities - you're earning interest every night so why would you want to 'repo' your securities where you are paying interest for that overnight loan (securities lending is another animal). So, it is those that 'lever-up' and need the cash for settlement purposes on securities they've bought with borrowed money that needs to utilize the repo desk. With this in mind, as we continue to see this need to obtain cash (again, needed to settle other securities purchases), it shows these firms don't have the capital to add more inventory to, what appears to be, a bloated inventory. Now comes the fun part: the Treasury is about to auction 3's, 10's, and 30-year bonds. If I am correct (again, I could be wrong), the Fed realizes securities firms don't have the shelf space to take down a good portion of these auctions. If there isn't enough retail/institutional demand, it will lead to not only a crappy sale but major concerns to the street that there is now no backstop, at all, to any sell-off. At which point, everyone will want to be the first one through the door and sell immediately, but to whom? If there isn't enough liquidity in the repo market to finance their positions, the firms would be unable to increase their inventory. We all saw repo shut down on the 2008 crisis. Wall St runs on money. . OVERNIGHT money. They lever up to inventory securities for trading. If they can't get overnight money, they can't purchase securities. And if they can't unload what they have, it means the buy-side isn't taking on more either. Accounts settle overnight. This includes things like payrolls and bill pay settlements. If a bank doesn't have enough cash to payout what its customers need to pay out, it borrows. At least one and probably more than one banks are insolvent. That's what's going on. First, it can't be one or two banks that are short. They'd simply call around until they found someone to lend. But they did that, and even at markedly elevated rates, still, NO ONE would lend them the money. That tells me that it's not a problem of a couple of borrowers, it's a problem of no lenders. And that means that there's no bank in the world left with any real liquidity. They are ALL maxed out. But as bad as that is, and that alone could be catastrophic, what it really signals is even worse. The lending rates are just the flip side of the coin of the value of the assets lent against. If the rates go up, the value goes down. And with rates spiking to 10%, how far does the value fall? Enormously! And if banks had to actually mark down the value of the assets to reflect 10% interest rates, then my god, every bank in the world is insolvent overnight. Everyone's capital ratios are in the toilet, and they'd have to liquidate. We're talking about the simultaneous insolvency of every bank on the planet. Bank runs. No money in ATMs, Branches closed. Safe deposit boxes confiscated. The whole nine yards, It's actually here. The scenario has tended to guide toward for years and years is actually happening RIGHT NOW! And people are still trying to say it's under control. Every bank in the world is currently insolvent. The only thing keeping it going is printing billions of dollars every day. Financial Armageddon isn't some far off future risk. It's here. Prepare accordingly. This fiat system has reached the end of the line, and it's not correct that fiat currencies fail by design. The problem is corruption and manipulation. It is corruption and cheating that erodes trust and faith until the entire system becomes a gigantic fraud. Banks and governments everywhere ARE the problem and simply have to be removed. They have lost all trust and respect, and all they have left is war and mayhem. As long as we continue to have a majority of braindead asleep imbeciles following orders from these psychopaths, nothing will change. Fiat currency is not just thievery. Fiat currency is SLAVERY. Ultimately the most harmful effect of using debt of undefined value as money (i.e., fiat currencies) is the de facto legalization of a caste system based on voluntary slavery. The bankers have a charter, or the legal *right*, to create money out of nothing. You, you don't. Therefore you and the bankers do not have the same standing before the law. The law of the land says that you will go to jail if you do the same thing (creating money out of thin air) that the banker does in full legality. You and the banker are not equal before the law. ALL the countries of the world; Islamic or secular, Jewish or Arab, democracy or dictatorship; all of them place the bankers ABOVE you. And all of you accept that only whining about fiat money going down in exchange value over time (price inflation which is not the same as monetary inflation). Actually, price inflation itself is mainly due to the greed and stupidity of the bankers who could keep fiat money's exchange value reasonably stable, only if they wanted to. Witness the crash of silver and gold prices which the bankers of the world; Russian, American, Chinese, Jewish, Indian, Arab, all of them collaborated to engineer through the suppression and stagnation of precious metals' prices to levels around the metals' production costs, or what it costs to dig gold and silver out of the ground. The bankers of the world could also collaborate to keep nominal prices steady (as they do in the case of the suppression of precious metals prices). After all, the ability to create fiat money and force its usage is a far more excellent source of power and wealth than that which is afforded simply by stealing it through inflation. The bankers' greed and stupidity blind them to this fact. They want it all, and they want it now. In conclusion, The bankers can create money out of nothing and buy your goods and services with this worthless fiat money, effectively for free. You, you can't. You, you have to lead miserable existences for the most of you and WORK in order to obtain that effectively nonexistent, worthless credit money (whose purchasing/exchange value is not even DEFINED thus rendering all contracts based on the null and void!) that the banker effortlessly creates out of thin air with a few strokes of the computer keyboard, and which he doesn't even bother to print on paper anymore, electing to keep it in its pure quantum uncertain form instead, as electrons whizzing about inside computer chips which will become mute and turn silent refusing to tell you how many fiat dollars or euros there are in which account, in the absence of electricity. No electricity, no fiat, nor crypto money. It would appear that trust is deteriorating as it did when Lehman blew up . Something really big happened that set off this chain reaction in the repo markets. Whatever that something is, we aren't be informed. They're trying to cover it up, paper it over with conjured cash injections, play it cool in front of the cameras while sweating profusely under the 5 thousands dollar suits. I'm guessing that the final high-speed plunge into global economic collapse has begun. All we see here is the ripples and whitewater churning the surface, but beneath the surface, there is an enormous beast thrashing desperately in its death throws. Now is probably the time to start tying up loose ends with the long-running prep projects, just saying. In other words, prepare accordingly, and Get your money out of the banks. I don't care if you don't believe me about Bitcoin. Get your money out of the banks. Don't keep any more money in a bank than you need to pay your bills and can afford to lose.











The Financial Armageddon Economic Collapse Blog tracks trends and forecasts , futurists , visionaries , free investigative journalists , researchers , Whistelblowers , truthers and many more













The Financial Armageddon Economic Collapse Blog tracks trends and forecasts , futurists , visionaries , free investigative journalists , researchers , Whistelblowers , truthers and many more

The FBI released a summary of its file from the Hillary Clinton email investigation on Friday, showing details of Clinton's explanation of her use of a private email server to handle classified communications. The release comes nearly two months after FBI Director James Comey announced that although Clinton's handling of classified information was "extremely careless," it did not rise to the level of a prosecutable offense. Attorney General Loretta Lynch announced the next day that she would not pursue charges in the matter. "We are making these materials available to the public in the interest of transparency and in response to numerous Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests," the FBI noted in a statement sent to reporters with links to the documents. The documents include notes from Clinton's July 2 interview with agents, as well as a "factual summary of the FBI's investigation into this matter," according to the FBI release. Throughout her interview with agents, Clinton repeatedly said she relied on the career professionals she worked with to handle classified information correctly. The agents asked about a series of specific emails, and in each case Clinton said she wasn't worried about the particular material being discussed on a nonclassified channel.