The President attacking the Federal Reserve

Well, what is the distinction?

JWK

You really should walk away.

A normal person would be embarrassed.

1 Like

What is the distinction between a “Federal Reserve Note” and a “Dollar”? And, is it not a fact our Founders specifically rejected allowing bank notes of any kind to be made a “legal tender”?

JWK

If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, (i.e., the “business cycle”) the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered ___ attributed to Thomas Jefferson

Well there certainly is a desire for GLOBAL GOVERNANCE. And yes, that is a problem, for freedom loving people.

JWK

Our Founders intended ordinary citizens to keep and bear arms [a contemporary fire arm used by ordinary militia personnel] so they would be able to defend themselves against a despotic government if necessary.

It is crazy.

^^^^^^This guy ^^^^^^ wants me to read the works of a white supremacist/anti semitic/ holocaust denying ■■■■■■■■ A guy who was one of the progenitors of the Christian Identity movement… a movement where a straight line can be drawn from Sheldon Emry’s “America’s Promise Ministries” to the Aryan Nations and the KKK on to Timothy McVeigh… to bolster his views on the Federal Reserve.

And instead of being embarrassed …^^^^ This Guy^^^^ thinks that I should take him seriously.

Bonkers.

5 Likes

No, it is not a fact. Congress has sole discretion to determine what is made legal tender, and they have determined that Federal Reserve Notes act as such [1].

  1. 31 U.S. Code § 5103 - Legal tender | U.S. Code | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute

Still attacking the messenger and not the message? What have you found objectionable in Billions for the Bankers - debts for the people ?

Additionally, I’m still waiting for you to explain the distinction between a “Federal Reserve Note” and a “Dollar”.

Finally, is it not a fact our founder specifically forbid notes of any kind to be made a “legal tender”?

JWK

“Of all the contrivances for cheating the laboring class of mankind, none have been more effectual than that which deludes them with paper money. This is the most effectual of inventions to fertilize the rich man’s field by the sweat of the poor man’s brow.”_____ Daniel Webster.

You have offered no evidence whatsoever that our founders did not specifically reject allowing notes of any kind to be made a legal tender.

JWK

This is the last I am going to waste my time with this, because honestly I have things to do today.

But take this advice.

If one wants to be taken seriously, one should use sources that are not from racist/antisemitic/holocaust denying ■■■■■■■■■

Right now I take your points as seriously as a guy on the corner trying to get me to vote for Lyndon LaRouche.

1 Like

Your continued deflections are noted. I will once again ask you to explain the distinction between a “Federal Reserve Note” and a “Dollar”.

Additionally, is it not a fact our founders specifically forbid notes of any kind to be made a “legal tender”?

JWK

A1S8C5 - they have the power to coin money and determine its value. I posted legislation where they have designated FRNs as legal tender. It is not prohibited by the constitution. It doesn’t matter what dead men think.

2 Likes

You still have offered no evidence that our Founders did not specifically reject allowing notes of any kind to be made a legal tender.

Now, let us review the historical facts, my friend.

In regard to the Federal Reserve Act of December 23, 1913, Congress unconstitutionally reassigned a power of Congress to regulate the value of our nation’s currency, and placed that power in the hands of private bankers. But what few people realize is the very intention of the Act was to create a money monopoly for a privileged group of private bankers, and this was done by making Federal Reserve Notes a LEGAL TENDER FOR ALL DEBTS, PUBLIC AND PRIVATE, in spite of our founders expressed intentions to forbid Notes of any kind to be made a legal tender.

For those who are not familiar with our founder’s specifically stated intentions during the framing of our Constitution, here is what transpired during the convention with regard to bank notes being made a legal tender. SEE The Debates in the Federal Convention of 1787, reported by James Madison : August 16

Mr. Govr. MORRIS moved to strike out “and emit bills on the credit of the U. States”-If the United States had credit such bills would be unnecessary: if they had not, unjust & useless.

Mr. BUTLER, 2ds. the motion.

Mr. MADISON, will it not be sufficient to prohibit the making them a tender? This will remove the temptation to emit them with unjust views. And promissory notes in that shape may in some emergencies be best.

____ cut _____

Mr. READ, thought the words, if not struck out, would be as alarming as the mark of the Beast in Revelations.

Mr. LANGDON had rather reject the whole plan than retain the three words “(and emit bills”)

On the motion for striking out
N. H. ay. Mas. ay. Ct ay. N. J. no. Pa. ay. Del. ay. Md. no. Va. ay. [FN23] N. C. ay. S. C. ay. Geo. ay.

[FN23] This vote in the affirmative by Virga. was occasioned by the acquiescence of Mr. Madison who became satisfied that striking out the words would not disable the Govt. from the use of public notes as far as they could be safe & proper; & would only cut off the pretext for a paper currency, and particularly for making the bills a tender either for public or private debts.

The irrefutable fact is, our founding fathers intended the market place, and only the market place, to determine what notes, if any, were safe and proper to accept in payment of debt, and they specifically chose to forbid folks in government to make a particular bank note, or any “note”, a legal tender, which if allowed would literally force people and business owners to accept worthless script in payment of debt.

As a matter of fact, one of the delegates to convention who helped frame our Constitution who lived in Connecticut was defrauded by a legal tender law made in Rhode Island which required him to accept worthless script in payment of debt. As one of the delegates to the Convention Rodger Sherman was quite influential in prohibiting our government to emit bills on the credit of the United States and likewise prohibiting folks in government making notes of any kind a legal tender in payment of debt!

To lean how Roger Sherman was defrauded see his work titled: A Caveat Against Injustice … An inquiry into the evils of a fluctuating medium of exchange.

And, the question is, how is it not a crime for the Treasure of the United States and Secretary of the Treasury to sign Federal Reserve Notes which declare on their face “THIS NOTE IS LEGAL TENDER FOR ALL DEBTS, PUBLIC AND PRIVATE“? Should they not be charged with misfeasance and malfeasance in addition to complicity with a privileged banking institution which defrauds the public with unconstitutional Federal Reserve Notes?

JWK

“Of all the contrivances for cheating the laboring class of mankind, none have been more effectual than that which deludes them with paper money. This is the most effectual of inventions to fertilize the rich man’s field by the sweat of the poor man’s brow.”_____ Daniel Webster.

That link doesn’t support your position…at all.

International communication and shared resources by stakeholders of each country, in the 21st century…the horror!!

When the messenger is an anti-semitic holocaust denying white supremicist, yeah, attacking the messenger is completely warranted, and nothing such a person says should be listed to.

Why do you base your arguments on such a person?

fact: the federal reserve is not the first “national banl”
there was also the first and second banks of the united states.

the first bank had a 20 year charter and its creation was pushed bu alexander hamilton. it ran from 1791-1811
the 2nd bank of the US was founded in 186 and was based on the first bank. it had a federal charter from 1816-1836.
the 2nd bank actually issued bank notes.

Yes it does.

:roll_eyes:

JWK

“Of all the contrivances for cheating the laboring class of mankind, none have been more effectual than that which deludes them with paper money. This is the most effectual of inventions to fertilize the rich man’s field by the sweat of the poor man’s brow.”_____ Daniel Webster.

It’s funny that you leave out the words that completely contradict your entire argument:

Mr. Govr. MORRIS . striking out the words will leave room still for notes of a responsible minister which will do all the good without the mischief. The Monied interest will oppose the plan of Government, if paper emissions be not prohibited.

Mr. GHORUM was for striking out, without inserting any prohibition. if the words stand they may suggest and lead to the measure.

Col. [FN20] MASON had doubts on the subject. Congs. he thought would not have the power unless it were expressed. Though he had a mortal hatred to paper money, yet as he could not foresee all emergences, he was unwilling to tie the hands of the Legislature. He observed that the late war could not have been carried on, had such a prohibition existed.

Mr. GHORUM . The power as far as it will be necessary or safe, is involved in that of borrowing.

Mr. MERCER was a friend to paper money, though in the present state & temper of America, he should neither propose nor approve of such a measure. He was consequently opposed to a prohibition of it altogether.

1 Like

“Striking out the words will leave room still for notes of a responsible minister…”

Federal…Reserve…NOTES.

Hmmm.

Hmmm … I see you edited out the important part

*23. This vote in the affirmative by Virga. was occasioned by the acquiescence of Mr. Madison who became satisfied that striking out the words would not disable the Govt. from the use of public notes as far as they could be safe & proper; & would only cut off the pretext for a paper currency, and particularly for making the bills a tender either for public or private debts.

:roll_eyes:

Sure makes you think