A judge in the Virgin Islands has recently questioned the lawyers of Jeffrey Epstein’s estate, after an old bank account registered to Epstein received millions of dollars from the estate in the months since his death. The account was opened by Epstein in the Virgin Islands in 2014 and was reportedly intended to be used for an international banking firm that he planned to develop.
On his application, Epstein said that he wanted to pursue the “dynamic discipline of international banking.” Meanwhile, on that same application he glossed over his very serious criminal history and his status as a registered sex offender, saying that he dealt with a previous legal challenge but the case was discontinued.
The account in the Virgin Islands sat dormant with very little activity for many years, and it is unclear whether or not his international banking firm ever brought on clients. Local authorities suspect it was used as some type of shell company for his criminal enterprise. Despite the lack of activity and Epstein’s criminal record the bank renewed his license every year since he was first approved.
The fact that this account exists is not unusual in itself—Epstein had dozens of bank accounts throughout the world that he used for a variety of different purposes, both legal and illegal. What is strange is that tens of millions of dollars have been flowing from Epstein’s estate into this Virgin Islands account since his alleged suicide. To make matters even more suspicious, the account was nearly cleaned out by the beginning of 2020 with no clear explanation of where the money went.
The New York Times reported on Tuesday that the bank account had $693,157 in assets when Epstein died back in August but received roughly $12.9 million in the months since. The account was cleared out and left with just under a half-million dollars around the first of the year.
When questioned by Judge Carolyn Hermon-Purcell, the lawyers for Epstein’s estate said that the payments were made “in error,” but the judge was not satisfied with the explanation and demanded that the lawyers provide a full accounting of the payments made from the estate.
“There’s no explanation for it,” the judge said.
It is not clear when the lawyers for Epstein’s estate will be required to turn over the records, but it is expected to be a priority considering the many lawsuits that have been filed against the estate.
via 911FreeFall.com: Host Andy Steele is joined by James Corbett of The Corbett Report to discuss the steps that YouTube has taken in recent years to diminish the presence of alternative information and voices on its platform. (Recorded December 2019)
9/11: A Conspiracy Theory
Google Video in 2006 (note multiple 9/11 and truth related videos on front page)
The interview with the google whistleblower is especially fascinating. It starts at 21:45.
Merck Exec Cashes In Millions; “Measles Amnesia” with Dr. David Brownstein, MD; The Google Whistleblower, Zach Vorhies, Tells All
Merck exec cashes in:
DNC Chairman Tom Perez has called for an ‘immediate recanvass’ of the Iowa caucuses on Thursday after an app create by former Clinton and Obama staffers botched the count.
“Enough is enough,” tweeted Perez Thursday afternoon, via Politico. “In light of the problems that have emerged in the implementation of the delegate selection plan and in order to assure public confidence in the results, I am calling on the Iowa Democratic Party to immediately begin a recanvass.”
Enough is enough. In light of the problems that have emerged in the implementation of the delegate selection plan and in order to assure public confidence in the results, I am calling on the Iowa Democratic Party to immediately begin a recanvass.
— Tom Perez (@TomPerez) February 6, 2020
While former South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg claimed victory, he was virtually tied with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) at 26% with 97% of precincts reporting. According to the Associated Press, the race was too close to call.
The recount means that nobody will know exactly who won Iowa going into Friday night’s Democratic debate in New Hampshire, which holds its primary Tuesday.
Perez’s tweet has stoked controversy among many who recall how the DNC stacked the deck against Sanders in the 2016 election amid Hillary Clinton’s de-facto control over the organization.
Perez announcing an Iowa recanvas as it begins to look like Bernie will win is just… wow. I’m really starting to ask myself what they won’t do to stop Bernie from being the nominee.
— neontaster (@neontaster) February 6, 2020
whatever the hell a recanvas even is, you can guarantee it has more to do with the last 3% of pending caucus results than the reported 97% https://t.co/yqZvKuNGZH
— Bris Angel (@Cryptoterra) February 6, 2020
It’s really telling that they’re going with a recanvas instead of an independent, transparent audit https://t.co/qK72YIWnWP
— Cooper Lund (@cooperlund) February 6, 2020
— #BernieMoneyBomb (@NostrumRemedium) February 6, 2020
Needless to say, Donald Trump was the real winner in Iowa.
It’s ok, the satanic aristocracy will take care of us, now that they’ve largely taken care of the countries whose refugees are clamoring for entry on the southern border ….
Anyone familiar with the Bible is familiar with the Mark of the Beast: Without this mark, no man may buy or sell.
Regardless of one’s religious faith or lack thereof, there is an illustrative case in this biblical story: When one cannot buy or sell, one is metaphorically up the creek. Short of producing everything one needs oneself, buying and selling are necessary parts of virtually every modern person’s life.
In our modern world, we can begin to see a sort of Mark of the Beast: While ideas and even objects aren’t banned, they are increasingly difficult to come by, not due to government fiat, but due to the machinations of corporations hostile to the American values of freedom.
One can be in favor of the free market while recognizing a simple truth: There is no way that America’s Founding Fathers would have sat on their hands while five corporations dominated American discourse and commerce. It is hard to imagine, for example, the Founders suffering a single private bank processing most of the payments in the United States and refusing to do business with gun merchants. Alternately, one can scarcely imagine that the Founders would have sat still for three companies – all of them hostile toward American values and the Constitution – dominating political discourse and deplatforming anyone who opposed them.
This is the situation in which we find ourselves as a nation today: Guns are not illegal, but private companies will make it increasingly difficult to buy, sell or own them – up to and including pulling your bank account. You have all the freedom of speech you like, but prepare to be deplatformed or have your voice buried by large tech corporations with their thumb on the scale of American discourse.
As the American economy has become more corporatist – such that the market is controlled by the interrelation between monolithic mega-corporations, Wall Street and the state – and less capitalistic and dynamic, the American press and economy are now being dominated by forces hostile toward the American public and American values.
No less an authority than James Madison warned Americans that the First Amendment alone was not enough to protect free speech. In Federalist No. 47 and Federalist No. 51, he argued that the separation of powers was necessary to protect free speech by preventing one branch of government from accumulating too much power at the expense of the others and, indeed, the rest of society at large.
This is an important point to remember when considering the First Amendment implications of Big Tech and its war on free speech and gun freedom. The Founding Fathers did not live in a world where a few large corporations had more power than the (incredibly limited and power impoverished) government had, either at the federal or the state level. It’s doubtful that they could have conceived of such a thing.
But they did carefully consider the problem of centralized power as it pertained to the rights enshrined in the Constitution. At the end of the day, the Constitution is just a piece of paper with no ability to enforce itself. What’s more, if the Founders did not address the notion that the private sector could meaningfully and substantially circumvent rights for all Americans, it was simply because they could not conceive of such a thing, not because they were writing the private sector a blank check.
This is amazing. A significant step toward “draining the swamp” but I wonder whether the dollar itself would survive a real investigation. In any case, JPM is probably the biggest shareholder in the federal reserve itself.
There was a time when the merest mention of gold manipulation in “reputable” media was enough to have one branded a perpetual conspiracy theorist with a tinfoil farm out back… and immediately banned from social media.
That was roughly coincident with a time when Libor, FX, mortgage, and bond market manipulation was also considered unthinkable, when High Frequency Traders were believed to “provide liquidity”, or when the stock market was said to not be manipulated by the Fed, and when the ever-confused media, always eager to take “complicated” financial concepts at the face value set by a self-serving establishment, never dared to question anything.
That has now changed…
In November 2018, a former JPMorgan precious-metals trader admitted he engaged in a six-year spoofing scheme that defrauded investors in gold, silver, platinum, and palladium futures contracts.
John Edmonds, 36, of Brooklyn, New York, pleaded guilty under seal on Oct. 9 in the District of Connecticut to commodities fraud, conspiracy to commit wire fraud, commodities price manipulation, and spoofing. As Justice notes in a statement:
“From approximately 2009 through 2015 John Edmonds engaged in a sophisticated scheme to manipulate the market for precious metals futures contracts for his own gain by placing orders that were never intended to be executed,” said Assistant Attorney General Benczkowski.
“The Criminal Division is committed to prosecuting those who undermine the investing public’s trust in the integrity of our commodities markets through spoofing or any other illegal conduct.”
That was followed, a year later, by the DOJ charging the entire precious-metals trading desk at JPMorgan of being deeply involved in what prosecutors described as a “massive, multiyear scheme to manipulate the market for precious metals futures contracts and defraud market participants.”
The DoJ charged Michael Nowak, a JPMorgan veteran and former head of its precious metals trading desk and Gregg Smith, another trader on JPM’s metals desk, in the probe. (Blythe Masters was somehow omitted).
“Based on the fact that it was conduct that was widespread on the desk, it was engaged in in thousands of episodes over an eight-year period — that it is precisely the kind of conduct that the RICO statute is meant to punish,” Assistant Attorney General Brian Benczkowski told reporters.
Here’s where it gets extra interesting: according to Bloomberg, the unusually aggressive language language embraced by prosecutors reminds legal experts of indictments utilizing the RICO Act – a law allowing prosecutors to take down ‘criminal enterprises’ like the mafia by charging all members of the organization for any crimes committed by an individual on behalf of the organization.
Prosecutors charged the head of JP Morgan’s global metals trading operation and two other traders with “conspiracy to conduct the affairs of an enterprise involved in interstate or foreign commerce through a pattern of racketeering activity” – language that is typically used to describe a RICO charge.
And now, 5 months later, Bloomberg reports that things have escalated even further.
According to two people familiar with the matter, Bloomberg reports that U.S. authorities that accused six JPMorgan Chase & Co. employees of rigging precious-metals futures are building a criminal case against the bank itself.
So more than 11 years after the farce began, this previously unreported investigation of the global bank’s parent company – part of a wide-ranging federal clampdown on market manipulation – raises the prospect of criminal charges and significant fines against America’s largest bank.
Additionally, Bloomberg notes that, according to a third person familiar with the matter, authorities are conducting a similar racketeering investigation of a second financial firm involving spoofing.
And all of this is occurring as more and more investors realize the value of gold as a hedge against the idiocy of politicians and policy-makers… in other words, just as manipulating precious-metals prices lower would be at its most use to the banking elites.
Conspiracy theory becomes conspiracy fact… and we wonder whether any of this would be public had Twitter’s newly-minted “censor anything we don’t like” policies been in place?