Email

The Fed’s Plotting to Take Down Donald Trump. Here’s When.

0 | By Shah Gilani

If you don’t believe what I’ve been screaming for years that the Federal Reserve System is the greatest criminal conspiracy in American history and that they, as a private enterprise, run the country, you’re about to see the truth for yourself.

In a Bloomberg op-ed piece on August 27, 2019, William Dudley, the former vice-chairman of the Federal Open Market Committee and former president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, who stepped down from the Fed last year and attended last week’s Jackson Hole central bankers confab, threatened the President of the United States by advocating that the Fed not accommodate the President’s trade war with China and essentially raise rates if they have to in order to drive the country into recession so Donald Trump doesn’t get reelected.

My last two articles here have been about attempts to manufacture a recession to undermine Donald Trump’s reelection chances and what those efforts could mean for the stock market.

Sure, some of you thought I had lost it. But, Bill Dudley’s call to arms is proof positive that I am 100% right, about attempts to manufacture a recession and that the Fed is too powerful, too political, and a rogue state within the state that needs to be legislated out of existence.

It’s about time we get to the bottom of this…

Break Down of Dudley’s Argument One Falsehood at a Time

Here are direct excerpts from Dudley’s op-ed manifesto titled “The Fed Shouldn’t Enable Donald Trump” and my comments on his assertions.

  • “U.S. President Donald Trump’s trade war with China keeps undermining the confidence of businesses and consumers, worsening the economic outlook.” Dudley

Truly there is no proof the trade war is undermining the confidence of businesses and consumers, especially given the recent pick up in business investment and especially strong consumer spending.

  • “This manufactured disaster-in-the-making presents the Federal Reserve with a dilemma: Should it mitigate the damage by providing offsetting stimulus, or refuse to play along?” Dudley

How is the trade war a manufactured disaster?

What happened to protecting American companies, technology, trade secrets, fighting state-sponsored cyber criminality, etc. President Trump is defending the U.S., he is counterpunching what China manufactured, the second biggest economy in the world, built on theft.

  • “They (the Fed) place little weight on how their actions will affect decisions in other areas, such as government spending or trade policy. The Fed, for example, wouldn’t hold back on interest-rate cuts to compel Congress to provide fiscal stimulus instead. Staying above the political fray helps the central bank maintain its independence.” Dudley

Nothing could be more disingenuous or a bigger lie.

Government spending is lately 100% facilitated by the Fed, since politicians don’t want to raise taxes.

That’s how the Fed is allowed to remain independent, they provide stimulus, giving cover to governments who don’t have to exercise fiscal anything.

Serving politicians need to not raise taxes and keep spending to get votes is exactly how the Fed keeps its independence.

Where did the $4.5 trillion parked on their fake balance sheet come from?

It’s from government debt politicians didn’t want to impact markets with or offset with taxes.

  • “But what if the Fed’s accommodation encourages the president to escalate the trade war further, increasing the risk of a recession? The central bank’s efforts to cushion the blow might not be merely ineffectual. They might actually make things worse.” Dudley

This is telling it like it is.

Dudley’s saying more easy money, free money, provided by the Fed, as it has been since 2008, may in the long run be ineffectual.

Or worse, make things worse.

[URGENT] Millions could be caught flat-footed (but you don’t have to)

How about asking Dudley to explain that aspect of monetary policy he’s been overseeing since 2009?

  • “Yet the Fed could go much further. Officials could state explicitly that the central bank won’t bail out an administration that keeps making bad choices on trade policy, making it abundantly clear that Trump will own the consequences of his actions.” Dudley

So, the Fed is supposed to make choices on trade policy? Who says the administration is making bad choices, Dudley? The Fed? Based on what?

  • “Such a harder line could benefit the Fed and the economy in three ways. First, it would discourage further escalation of the trade war, by increasing the costs to the Trump administration. Second, it would reassert the Fed’s independence by distancing it from the administration’s policies. Third, it would conserve much-needed ammunition, allowing the Fed to avoid further interest-rate cuts at a time when rates are already very low by historical standards.” Dudley

The real truth comes out here.

It’s about the Fed’s independence to run the country, that’s a private central bank with the power to control government and the economy, that’s what Dudley’s advocating protecting.

About that ammunition, the Fed should have let rates rise on their own accord according to free market pricing of risk and return prospects years ago.

  • “There’s even an argument that the election itself falls within the Fed’s purview. After all, Trump’s reelection arguably presents a threat to the U.S. and global economy, to the Fed’s independence and its ability to achieve its employment and inflation objectives. If the goal of monetary policy is to achieve the best long-term economic outcome, then Fed officials should consider how their decisions will affect the political outcome in 2020.” Dudley

Dudley makes a perfect case here for revoking the legislation that created the Fed in 1913.

The tail is wagging the dog and doing so publicly.

Dudley is saying the Fed can and should affect the election since he claims it is within their “purview.”

This is a fed mouthpiece warning it’s capable of a coup d’état.

It’s time to end the Fed, NOW!

Sincerely,

Shah

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *