Tuesday, October 07, 2008

Catherine Austin Fitts votes to execute Goldmann Sachs

a post and a couple of clarifying comments—

An E-Mail to a Member of the Research Team at Goldman Sachs



Thank you for the opportunity to be on your e-mail list. I appreciate your generosity and hard work.

I am writing to ask you to unsubscribe me from your list. I value your research reports. However, it would be hypocritical of me to accept them.

I believe in death penalties for private corporations and partnerships. My vote for one of the first to be executed is Goldman Sachs.

You and your colleagues have helped to build and manage a machinery that has committed treason and genocide on a breathtaking scale. The history of Goldman Sachs over the last two decades is living proof that it is possible to kill with a financial system and a pen.

The fact that you don’t understand what you and your colleagues are doing is breathtaking. It raises more than a few questions about whether you understand what is really behind the flow of funds you track and publish.

The question before us is who will pay the price of the mess that you and your colleagues have had such a significant hand in creating:

Who will lose their business and who will keep it?
Who will lose their job and who will keep it?
Who will lose their home and who will keep it?
Who will lose their reputation and who will not?
Who will lose their family and who will not?
Who will lose their health and who will not?
Who will lose their future and who will not?
Who will lose their life and who will not?
Who will lose their freedom and who will not?

My plan for bailing out the country would include asserting common law offsets against the assets of the NY Fed member banks and all of their partners and employees who benefited up to an amount sufficient to repay $4 trillion missing from the US government, to fund losses caused by the manipulation of the precious metals markets and to fund claims of fraudulent inducement and fraud on mortgages and mortgage securities. To fund the offsets, I would propose to seize the offshore and onshore assets of those who created the mortgage bubble and derivatives mess in the first place.

Frankly, I see no reason why millions of poor people around the world should pay a global tax through the dollar and US treasury and agency securities for which the American people are liable, so you and your colleagues can continue to live in comfort and luxury without concern that you will be held accountable to the same standards of enforcement applied to the people who live in the communities wrecked by the mortgage, money laundering and financial fraud that made you and your clients so powerful.

It seems to me if anyone should lose their business, jobs and home, it is you and your colleagues.

Sincerely Yours,

Catherine Austin Fitts


Re: common law right of offset. A right at “common law” is one that comes about through court precedent rather than a statute. Many, if not most, common law rights came into being before we had statutes, i.e., from England. Sometimes common law rights exist side-by-side with similar, or even the same, constitutional or statutory rights that are in “code” form. An attorney would argue in court for the common law right either when there is no statute or when the statute is more limited than the broader common law right.

A right of offset is just the right of one who holds the property of another (e.g., a bank) to seize that property to satisfy a debt or liability incurred by the owner of the property. So, for example, the IRS has the right to set off your tax refund against taxes otherwise due and unpaid. Similarly, if you have a savings account at a bank as well as a credit card with the same bank and you don’t pay the amount due on your credit card, the bank can apply (or “set off”) the amount in your savings account against the debt. Catherine is applying this concept in the case of member banks of the NY Fed on the theory that because the Federal Reserve Bank of New York is the depository for the US government, its members are responsible, or liable, for the “lost” $4 trillion of government money. As I understand her statement, she is suggesting that the federal government should seize, by means of an accounting offset, funds owed to the member banks by the US Government as a reimbursement to the American people for their loss. In that case, the banks whose money was seized would then have to sue the government and prove that they did not owe that money to the government in order to recover the amounts seized.


Oct 7th, 2008 at 4:35 pm
My dear Ms Fitts: You go girl…I have only one legal point concerning your continuous desire to recoup “the $4 trilion missing from the US government” ( I assume the Defense Dept. budget ). And that is: How would you deliver as discovery the accounting books of the Pentagon to corroberate the numbers? Furhermore, how would you also include the names of the actual banks to which the moneys were transfered? I am in complete favor of the recoupment of the vast ceo and executive officers abundant bonuses and pay to repay this admitted loss. Love your work. I’m falling asleep listening to you on coast to coast ( 2 am EST ), as I wake at 5 am…. be well and stay well, Richard




The NY Fed as depository for the US government is responsible for federal government bank accounts. According to US reports, US government agencies have over $4 trillion of undocumentable adjustments. Those are transactions that can not be proved to be authorized by the Congress, pursuant to the constitution. If you follow the common law rights of offset asserted in the Hamilton Securities case (see http://www.dunwalke.com/gideon), I would argue that the NY Fed banks are responsible for effecting unauthorized transactions. In theory, we do not have to prove where the money went or have the detail. We can assert our right to to that amount and proceed with offsets.

Such offsets could take the form of extinguishing outstanding debts, even taxes due. So you don’t get cash back from the parties involved. You simply extinguish what you owe.

If you combined such offsets with local tax escrows and local currencies, a lot could shift.

Labels: , , , ,


Post a Comment

<< Home

Web Site Counters
Staples Coupons