My morning train reads:

• The Bitcoin Perpetual Motion Machine Is Starting to Sputter: Crypto treasury companies quietly crept into index funds and retirement accounts. Its collapse is good news for all of us. (Slate)

• DraftKings and FanDuel spending millions on 2026 midterms: The two largest online sports gambling companies, DraftKings and FanDuel, have already spent millions of dollars on the 2026 midterm elections, according to FEC disclosures filed on Friday. This is a sea change for the industry, which has traditionally focused its political spending on state politics. (Popular Information)

• U.S. Manufacturing Is in Retreat and Trump’s Tariffs Aren’t Helping: Levies on imports were supposed to bring back a golden age of U.S. manufacturing. They haven’t worked, so far. (Wall Street Journal)

• Pick for Federal Reserve Chair May Surprise The President: A childhood job at a racetrack taught Kevin Warsh more than he realized about how to amass power. (Politico)

• Stop Blaming DoorDash for the Affordability Crisis: One DoorDash Discourse to rule them all: Food away from home is down. Groceries are up. This is especially true for young people. Affordability is a real problem. (Mike Konczal)

• Meet ‘Coalie,’ the Lethal Mascot for Dirty Energy: Secy of the Interior Doug Burgum is using an anthropomorphized lump of coal, named “Coalie”, as the mascot of President Donald Trump’s “American Energy Dominance Agenda.” The use of Coalie as a mascot for the “American Energy Dominance Agenda” is seen as a perversion of its original purpose, as it now promotes the use of “clean, beautiful coal” despite the negative environmental effects of coal consumption. (Bloomberg free)

• The Murder of The Washington Post: Wednesday’s layoffs are the latest attempt to kill what makes the paper special. (The Atlantic)

• America has reached peak sauce, and some people won’t leave home without it: Just how much do we love condiments? We’re stashing them in purses, backpacks and glove compartments. (Washington Post)

• The Paramilitary ICE and CBP Units at the Center of Minnesota’s Killings: Two agents involved in the shooting deaths of US citizens in Minneapolis are reportedly part of highly militarized DHS units whose extreme tactics are generally reserved for war zones. (Wired) see also The powerful tools in ICE’s arsenal to track suspects — and protesters: Biometric trackers, cellphone location databases and drones are among the surveillance technologies that federal agents are tapping in their deportation campaign. (Washington Post) see also ICE Begins Buying ‘Mega’ Warehouse Detention Centers Across US: Plans for ‘mega centers’ and jails in nearly two dozen communities have sparked protests over suitability, proximity to homes and schools. (CityLab)

• No Cult Favorite: BREAKING AWAY Is a Masterpiece: I trust Breaking Away completely. Simply and without strain, it remains one of the greatest and most truthful American films ever made. (Tremble…Sigh…Wonder…)

Be sure to check out our Masters in Business interview  this weekend with Bob Moser, CEO and founder of Prime Group Holdings, a private investor in unique real estate holdings. They created Prime Storage, one of the largest, privately-held self-storage brands in the world, with over 19 million rentable square feet of space and 255 locations across 28 states and the U.S. Virgin Islands. The firm has acquired over $10 billion in real estate assets.

 

 

The economy is doing great! (For 34 people)

Source: Your Brain on Money

Sign up for our reads-only mailing list here.

 

 

The post 10 Thursday AM Reads appeared first on The Big Picture.

Dutch Government Refuses To Probe UK Travel Ban On Eva Vlaardingerbroek

Authored by Thomas Brooke via Remix News,

The Dutch government has refused to investigate or seek clarification from the United Kingdom after Dutch commentator Eva Vlaardingerbroek had her permission to travel to Britain revoked, confirming it has not even asked London for an explanation over the decision.

The position was set out in formal parliamentary responses from Foreign Affairs Minister Caspar Veldkamp’s ministry, delivered on Jan. 30 by Minister Van Weel, after questions were submitted by Lidewij de Vos, a Member of Parliament for the right-wing Forum for Democracy (FvD).

De Vos questioned the government over last month’s revocation of Vlaardingerbroek’s UK Electronic Travel Authorization (ETA), which now prevents her from entering Britain without a visa. British authorities informed the commentator that her authorization had been canceled because her presence in the UK was deemed “not conducive to the public good,” and that the decision could not be appealed.

Asked whether the Dutch government had sought clarification from the British government or ambassador, the minister responded simply, “No.”

Holy sh*t.

I’ve been banned from traveling to the UK. They revoked my ETA.

"Your presence in the UK is not considered to be conductive to the public good."

3 days after posting this about Starmer. https://t.co/NqWBtaTkZe pic.twitter.com/lm5lZgL2i7

— Eva Vlaardingerbroek (@EvaVlaar) January 14, 2026

When pressed on whether the government would now demand an explanation, the minister replied that the Netherlands would not intervene in such cases, stating, “The Dutch government is not a party in this matter and does not engage with the United Kingdom regarding individual cases.”

“It is not for the Dutch government to judge or interfere in how legal remedies are structured under United Kingdom national legislation,” the minister added.

The responses mark the first official Dutch government reaction to the controversy, which has drawn attention internationally.

Vlaardingerbroek said she received notice of the ban shortly after posting criticism of British Prime Minister Keir Starmer on social media. Reacting at the time on X, she wrote, “I’ve been banned from traveling to the UK. No reason given. No right to appeal. Zero due process. Just an email saying the UK government deems me ‘not conducive to the public good’ — exactly three days after I criticized Keir Starmer.

“I guess my point that the UK is no longer a free country has been indisputably proven,” she added.

The right-wing commentator later accused her own government of failing to defend one of its citizens, posting, “While Orbán, Salvini, and even the U.S. State Department spoke out about my UK travel ban, the Dutch government just came forward saying it sees no problem with the UK banning one of its citizens and is not going to take action. Always a pleasure to be able to count on one’s own government.”

The British government has not publicly commented on the individual case. However, officials have said ETA cancellations do not automatically amount to a permanent ban and that border decisions remain sovereign matters.

In its parliamentary reply, the Dutch government also stated that it could not establish from media reporting that Vlaardingerbroek’s opinions were the reason for the cancellation, adding that revoking an ETA is not legally the same as denying entry. It does, however, mean that the subject cannot enter the country without a visa and thus must formally apply for entry. Travel between the United Kingdom and the Netherlands is usually visa-free for nationals of the two countries.

“It just confirms everything that everyone has been saying, two-tier Keir, two-tier justice.”

Eva Vlaardingerbroek claims Keir Starmer is a hypocrite on The Liz Truss Show:

“The fact that all the immigrants are allowed in without any questions asked, without papers, and they… pic.twitter.com/AIAVBkAksj

— Liz Truss (@trussliz) January 28, 2026

During a recent conversation with former British prime minister Liz Truss, Vlaardingerbroek criticized what she described as double standards in British justice and immigration policy, saying, “It just confirms everything that everyone has been saying, two-tier Keir, two-tier justice.”

She added, “The fact that all the immigrants are allowed in without any questions asked, without papers, and they are given the free hotels, they are given everything for free.”

Truss also commented publicly on the case, writing on X, “People who tell the truth about what’s happening in Britain are banned from the country. People who come to the country to commit crime are allowed to stay.”

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán similarly expressed support, saying Vlaardingerbroek was “always welcome in Hungary.”

In its parliamentary responses, the Dutch government also declined to amend travel advice for the United Kingdom, stating it had received no signals of changing safety risks for Dutch travelers.

Read more here...

Tyler Durden Thu, 02/05/2026 - 06:30

UBS: SpaceX-xAI Merger Signals Rise Of "Orbital AI"

In September 2024, we penned a note that Elon Musk was on track to become the world's first trillionaire by 2027, driven by what we described as "space race bets." That call looks increasingly correct following the merger of Musk's SpaceX and xAI earlier this week, a transaction that has lifted his net worth to $850 billion.

By contrast, former WeWork CEO Adam Neumann, who once famously said in 2019 that he wanted to live forever and be the first trillionaire, must be watching Musk's empire soar to new heights in disgust. Musk's decision to fold xAI into SpaceX is already being framed by UBS as an "orbital AI" investment angle, positioning Musk at the center of low-Earth orbit dominance and next-generation AI compute (read more here). 

UBS trader Jephine Wong provided clients on Wednesday with what has caught her eye with the xAI-SpaceX deal:

X" marks the spot as Elon Musk moved swiftly to fold xAI into SpaceX — an all‑stock deal valuing the combined entity at ~$1.25T (~$1T for SpaceX; ~$250B for xAI). The signal is clear: SpaceX is planting a flag in orbital AI, betting that a meaningful share of compute — essentially data centers in space — will be operating within 2–3 years. It's a bold storyline to take into a potential summer/fall ~$50B IPO, but it also introduces new complexity for investors: SpaceX is generating ~$8B in EBITDA, while xAI is burning approximately $1B per month. The roadshow narrative shifts from a pure‑play space champion to a space‑plus‑AI hybrid — asking investors to balance operating strength against AI‑scale capex. EchoStar, a holder of SpaceX‑linked assets, slipped on the news — a sign that not everyone is converted just yet.

Chart of The Week

Spaced Out: SpaceX's merger with xAI broke this week — just as SpaceX has become the undisputed heavyweight of the orbital payload market. The company is now so dominant it effectively is the global launch cadence (see UBS's John Hodulik chart below, report here). But pulling xAI into the fold adds a new twist. What had been a clean space‑infrastructure story now becomes a space × AI narrative, pairing orbital payload dominance with an AI business burning nearly $1B a month. The question for investors is whether this move expands the opportunity or complicates the story right before a  historic IPO comes into view. What do you think? Who are you backing for orbital AI? And does xAI have an edge the rest of the market hasn't spotted yet? We'd love to hear your thoughts!

What caught our eye this week?

SpaceX merges with xAI: the "Orbital AI" pitch

Musk entities merging: Musk folded xAI into SpaceX (website memo here) at a combined ~$1.25T valuation (SpaceX at ~$1T; xAI at ~$250B) via an all‑stock deal, arguing that "within 2–3 years" the lowest‑cost AI compute will be in space, supported by a jaw dropping FCC filing seeking approval for up to 1 million compute‑oriented satellites. The company still plans to go public this year, and had already begun lining up anchors for what could be a $50B raise. Investors got the message…. and some new nerves: EchoStar, a holder of SpaceX‑linked assets, slipped on the merger chatter, reflecting the sudden shift from a pure‑play space IPO to a space‑plus‑AI conglomerate. UBS John Hodulik (see here) covers Ecostar for us and has done a handy analysis of Echostar's ~3% stake in SpaceX and a one-pager on the company in late December.

Follow the numbers – to explain timing: xAI burned $8–$9.5B in 9M 2025 on only ~$210M of revenue… even after $20B+ raised (incl. $2B from Tesla). SpaceX, by contrast, is printing cash: roughly $8B 2025 EBITDA on $15–$16B revenue, powered by Starlink's ~9M subs and a launch cadence supporting a $1T+ IPO case. The merger brings together SpaceX's operating muscle with xAI's capex appetite, and gives the roadshow a unified "orbital AI" arc. Mgmt says the deal won't derail a 2026 listing timeline, and internal docs indicate a stock for stock structure (SpaceX shares at $526.59).

Professional subscribers can read much more from UBS about the 2026 IPO market here at our new Marketdesk.ai portal​​​​​​.

Tyler Durden Thu, 02/05/2026 - 05:45

EU Inc: Can Brussels' Latest Corporate Reform Escape Bureaucracy's Grip

Submitted by Thomas Kolbe

The European Commission is responding to mounting criticism of over-bureaucratization with the introduction of a new corporate legal form. “EU Inc” is intended to create a uniform legal structure that applies across the entire European Union economic area. A charming idea—but one that quickly sinks in the general bureaucratic madness.

The European Union has reached a point where it is considered lucky if a handful of days pass without new regulatory initiatives from the Brussels central apparatus.

To ease some pressure and deflect growing criticism of the EU’s bureaucratic jungle, Commission President Ursula von der Leyen presented the idea of a Europe-wide corporate legal form during the World Economic Forum in Davos.

The proposed new pan-European company type is called EU Inc. It would become the 28th European legal form, alongside national corporate types such as GmbH, SA, or Limited.

What von der Leyen pitched as an innovative project aims to simplify company formation for startups and scale-ups. The goal is to operate cross-border in all 27 member states of the Single Market without needing to create additional subsidiaries to comply with each nation’s legal requirements.

EU Inc is intended to enable a uniform, fully digitalized formation and administration process. Companies could be registered online within 48 hours—without a notary and without cumbersome paperwork.

The Commission also plans to introduce a central EU register, functioning as a one-stop shop and providing transparency on company formations, capital increases, and ownership structures. The project is currently in the early parliamentary consultation phase and could take effect in national law no earlier than 2027.

The Commission’s idea is attractive. Besides facilitating fast and simple company formation, it would be the first substantial initiative in years moving beyond mostly repressive regulation—truly aimed at deepening the European Single Market.

Faster market entry, simplified mergers, and potentially easier venture capital financing could follow—if national tax deregulation also occurs. That, however, seems unlikely given European regulatory practices.

The politically oft-cited capital markets union would thus receive its first, modest boost—a real-world link to the situation of entrepreneurs. Evidently, fragments of criticism from the business world occasionally reach Commission circles—who would have thought?

Where Are the Entrepreneurs?

As always with Brussels initiatives, the devil is in the details. First, national adoption of this new legal form must be achieved.

It is expected that powerful lobbying groups—from tax advisors to auditors—will work intensively to protect their interests, which are largely derived from the complexity of tax law, capital requirements, and formation procedures.

Over any supposed liberalization of economic activity looms the long shadow of European regulatory policy.

This is the real crux of European politics. Considering the economic structure of the European economy, one inevitably asks: where are the entrepreneurs who would even be willing or able to utilize this new EU Inc framework?

A single number illustrates the grotesque regulatory work of Brussels: last year alone, the European economy was flooded with over 1,400 new EU legal acts. That’s four new regulations per day. Directives, regulations, delegated acts, implementing acts—companies are drowning in an ideologically driven Brussels regulatory swamp.

CO₂ policies and supply chain directives are often in focus, scrutinizing every economic activity in detail and generating immense bureaucratic costs. Entrepreneurs increasingly work to fund administration—less to serve their markets.

What we see in Brussels is classic bureaucracy: once established, politically nurtured, and treated as a political vanguard, it develops a life of its own. Cynically, the production of legal acts is the only “good” keeping it alive.

The truth of this bureaucratic phenomenon often reveals itself openly—when politicians proudly list the laws they initiated, without any understanding of real economic life. It is the work record of a gravedigger, carving a path through the increasingly paralyzed productive sector of society.

Political and media support for EU climate regulation has created a self-referential bureaucracy now spreading into member states. With state quotas beyond 50%, the Rubicon of economic imbalance is crossed. Europe risks becoming a purely administrative hub while productive economy steadily shrinks.

The parasitic body consumes its host, accelerating its decay. Europe is degenerating into an administrative site with declining production activity.

Centrifugal Forces Gain Momentum

EU Inc could indeed be a charming solution for deepening the Single Market—if one day an orderly regulatory turnaround is initiated.

It is quite likely that the accelerating downward spiral of high public debt, falling productivity, rising unemployment, and a dramatic geopolitical decline of the continent will eventually pave the way for a conservative, market-oriented shift.

For Brussels central planners, particularly in Eastern Europe, a political storm is brewing that, once unified, could one day shatter the regulatory chains.

From a German perspective, however, it seems likely that the driving forces of climate-socialist transformation—undoubtedly concentrated in Berlin—will marshal their forces to continue the fatal path toward a command economy after breaking with the opposition.

* * * 

About the author: Thomas Kolbe, a Germany a graduate economist, has worked for over 25 years as a journalist and media producer for clients from various industries and business associations. As a publicist, he focuses on economic processes and observes geopolitical events from the perspective of the capital markets. His publications follow a philosophy that focuses on the individual and their right to self-determination.

Tyler Durden Thu, 02/05/2026 - 05:00

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.