Judge Orders Fed to Release Gold Records to Court

[Joanne98]

The New York traders are trying hard to keep a lid on silver and gold here.

Gold is struggling to break through the 1375 pivot and hold its gain, and silver is toying with the 29 handle.

Unless there is another liquidity market panic I expect these metals to follow their charts higher.


District Court Judge Orders Federal Reserve to Hand Over Gold Records

"If the U.S. gold reserves are just sitting somewhere, inert, unencumbered, and unused for surreptitious market intervention, what's the problem with full disclosure?"
Both Bernanke and Greenspan have testified that there have been no transactions in gold. Yet the Fed refuses to disclose documents that suggest circumstantially that there have been.

Even moreso, since the US bullion reserves belong to the people and not to a private banking cartel, there should be no records of any transactions by the Fed. Any transactions should have been handled by Treasury.

How Much Gold Does the US Have In Its Reserves?


How can the Fed be a trusted government regulator, given its position as a quasi-private banking cartel and an obsessive predilection for secrecy in its own dealings with what are clearly public assets?


If the Fed comes back and argues that it is not able to disclose its records of any gold transactions including sales, loans, and swaps because it was acting as agent for another party, whether it be the Treasury, BOJ, ECB, or the Bundesbank, then its time to audit the reserves by a third party answerable to the people.

http://jessescrossroadscafe.blogspot.com/2011/01/gold-daily-and-silver-weekly-charts_10.html

[phantom power]

1. That ought to be entertaining

:popcorn:

[SDuderstadt]

2. The Federal Reserve is NOT a...

"private banking cartel".

Why are you posting RW bullshit here?

[dixiegrrrrl]

5. What do YOU think the Fed Reserve status is?

It is a group of private banks which is supposed to follow laws of Congressional Oversight.
( Said laws have been broken, weakened, and said oversight has been ignored over the years)
Wiki has a good history of it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_Act


1. Q: Who owns the Federal Reserve Bank?
A:
There are actually 12 different Federal Reserve Banks around the country, and they are owned by big private banks. But the banks don't necessarily run the show. Nationally, the Federal Reserve System is led by a Board of Governors whose seven members are appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate.
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/who_owns_the_federal_reserve_bank.html

2.The fed is a quasi public institution. It is a corporation with shareholders, but the big decisions (i.e. monetary policy) get made by the board of governors. The governors on the board are appointed by the president and confirmed by Congress.
The federal reserve's shareholders are the member banks.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_the_Federal_Reserve_a_private_bank_If_so_please_explain_who_its_share_holders_are_and_what_advantage_does_this_banking_system_have_for_Americans_over_a_public_system

[SDuderstadt]

7. The Federal Reserve is...

an independent federal agency. While it is true that the member banks of the regional Federal Reserve banks "own" them (because they are required to buy subscription stock) they exercise virtually nothing in the way of ownership control and the regional banks are required to carry out the directives of the Board of Governors.

[BridgeTheGap]

8. Apologist for the Federal Reserve or just an antagonist? It isn't RW bullshit.

The federal reserve is a one of the prime drivers that got us into the mess we're in now.

[SDuderstadt]

12. The Federal Reserve is not...

"a private banking cartel", dude. That is RW bullshit.

[BridgeTheGap]

18. Who owns the Federal Reserve? n.t

[SDuderstadt]

19. No one "owns" the Federal Reserve, per se...

the member banks are required to purchase subscription stock in the regional Federal Reserve banks, but exercise virtually no real ownership control, as all regional FRB's are required to implement the directives of the Board of Governors.

You don't seem to know about what the Federal Reserve actually does or how it does it.

[BridgeTheGap]

21. Who selects the board of governors? n.t

[SDuderstadt]

22. They are nominated by the President and...

confirmed by the Senate.

As I stated before, you don't seem to know much about what the Federal Reserve does or how it does it. Why is that?

[BridgeTheGap]

23. Isn't that question facetious? Why don't you know what you don't know? Answer this one:

Why are so many members of Congress, including the Senate, so anxious to audit the Federal Reserve if they're already audited any way? Does it have anything to do with how TARP funds were used and the fact that the FED doesn't want to reveal it?

[SDuderstadt]

24. Changing the subject? n/t

[groovedaddy]

25. deleted

[SDuderstadt]

26. What question did I ask?

Why is it so hard for so many here to admit that the Fed is an independent federal agency?

[Taitertots]

29. Because publishing the Feds assets is a dangerously bad idea

Why would a body that depends on investing want to avoid having the contents of it's portfolio made public? When you understand why then you will understand why the Fed's exact holdings should remain private.

[Taitertots]

28. RIght wing bullshit got us into this mess, not the Fed

Now blaming the Fed for it is even more right wing bullshit. The Prime Driver for the current mess is Republican policies, I can explain this to you if you would like(Being DU I don't think I need to explain how Bush/Bush/Reagan screwed things up). Now I would like to hear your explanation for how the Fed, and not Republicans caused our current financial problems.

[BridgeTheGap]

31. It wasn't just Republicans that pushed for de-regulation of the finanical industry.

But they sure as hell have taken advantage of de-regulation. And where was the Fed when this was going on? Alan Greenspan froze out those officials who said de-regulation was a bad idea. Greenspan, and the Fed, following his leadership, contended there was no real-estate bubble, and evidently had no problem with derivatives and the other finanical games that we're being played.

Any Federal Agency spending our tax dollars should be held to account for how they are using that money. In the Fed's case, this would be how TARP funds were dispersed. Why? How do we know whether or not there are any vested interests sitting on the Fed who stand to gain by their actions? Do you take the same position that Greenspan took: these are all trustworthy people and that's why they don't need to be regulated?
Paul Volcker called them on it.

[SDuderstadt]

32. The Federal Reserve isn't...

"spending our tax dollars". Perhaps you could explain how they are.

Serious question: do you understand the difference between the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department?

Bonus question: do you understand how the T.A.R.P. fund actually worked?

[BridgeTheGap]

33. Excuse me, the feds role (via the chairman) was for oversight of Treasury in dispersing funds.

And those funds were from taxpayers, or at least on our "full faith and credit" as we are the government, right?
Answer 2. Yes.

Answer 3. That would be very difficult to ascertain due to lack of transparency on the part of the Treasury and the Fed.

And you never answered my question: How can we assure that there are no conflicts of interest in Fed policy without proper oversight?

And also, where did the Fed get the two trillion dollars to buy mortgage backed securities and treasury bonds?

[SDuderstadt]

35. So, the Treasury Department played little to no role?

That would be news to Geithner and Paulson. What about Barofsky?

Do you understand how the Fed is financed?

I'm not really hopeful for meaningful debate with someone who doesn't understand the difference between "dispersed" and "disbursed".

[BridgeTheGap]

36. I plead guilty to mispelling, so, yes, all hope is lost for me. Besides

You wouldn't answer several of the questions I asked.

[SDuderstadt]

37. Dude...

you were busted on your claim that the "Fed is spending taxpayer dollars".

To put it politely, you have no idea what you are talking about. Not knowing the difference between "disbursed" and "dispersed" can't be written off to a mere spelling mistake, either.

[BridgeTheGap]

39. I'm still learning. And I'm not "writing off" what was an honest spelling mistake. You

clearly know far more than me on how the Fed operates. But what I haven't seen is a response to are the transparency issues with the Fed. Given the environment we've been operating in for last 10 or more years, the scamming at high levels, the mortgage mess, derivatives (sp?), etc., it is a valid concern to ask if Fed board members (national and regional) benefit from Fed policies.

[SDuderstadt]

40. Then answer your own "question"...

instead, whether you know it or not, you are parrotting RW anti-Fed propaganda and making unproven allegations. I never cease to be amazed at how successful the RW has been at penetrating liberal strongholds with this stuff, to the point where a number of DU members are running around calling the Fed "evil" and yammering that it should be abolished.

No one is saying that more transparency would not beneficial but, at the same time, some of the calls for said "transparency" are, instead, thinly veiled assaults on the Fed's independence. It was setup with that independence for a reason.

[BridgeTheGap]

41. The assumption you seem to be making is that only the right wing has serious

problems with the Fed. There are plenty on the left who have a problem with it too. Using the "parroting RW anti-Fed propaganda" ignores this fact. There was plenty of bi-partisan support for H.R. 1207, as well as in the Senate. There were more than enough co-sponsors for this bill to pass, yet it failed. Why?

You're also ignoring the fact that the lack of transparency is a catalyst in generating conspiracy theories.

I firmly believe our "system" (financial, governmental) is currently corrupted by the flow of money between the financial (and others) industry and Congress in the form of lobbying efforts and campaign cash. Regulatory reform is desperately needed but it seems rather hopeless to expect it, given the influence these industries have over the political process. And Alan Greenspan, as Fed Chair, was party to it by failing to call for greater regulation of the financial industry. I think it's naive to think that the pervasiveness of this corruption does not extend into the Federal Reserve. Their resistance to transparency lends itself to this.

[SDuderstadt]

42. I already acknowledged the need for...

the greatest amount of transparency, while simultaneously preserving the greatest amount of independence for the Fed. Why does it surprise you that the legislative branch applies nearly constant pressure to interfere with that independence?

By virtue of a number of things you have said, as well as questions you have asked, it is apparent that you have a tenuous grasp of what the Fed does and how and why it does it. Wouldn't educating yourself in those areas first make more sense than just uncritically signing on to "reform the Fed" initiatives?

[BridgeTheGap]

43. It didn't "surprise me." What surprises me in this whole conversation is that you have

neglected to say anything about the current state of our economy, particularly the near crash 2+ years ago, and the role the Fed played in it. I really can't blame you for avoiding that, but it sure seems relevant to me (and Congress, as well as millions of Americans).

[SDuderstadt]

44. How about the role the Fed played in...

averting a depression?

What does any of this have to do with your lack of understanding of what the Fed does and how and why it does it, which is where I came in? You obviously don't understand how the Fed is funded.

[BridgeTheGap]

45. So far, so good...even though many economists disagree on the long term effects.

"The Federal Reserve's income is derived primarily from the interest on U.S. government securities that it has acquired through open market operations."

[SDuderstadt]

46. It also derives income from the services...

it provides to member, as well as non-member banks, and also derives income from the interest it charges banks on short-term loans made to those banks.

As far as economists disagreeing about the long-term impact, that's not surprising. I usually pay the most attention to Paul Krugman and Joseph Stiglietz.

[Hawkowl]

9. Uhhh, yes it is

If it isn't, I want my tuition back for my M.A. in economics.

[groovedaddy]

10. Who were you replying to? It's hard to tell. n.t

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SDuderstadt]

14. You not only should get your tuition back, but...

MSU should have their accreditation revoked if they taught you that the Federal Reserve is a "private banking cartel".

[girl gone mad]

17. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck..

it must be an independent federal agency.

[SDuderstadt]

20. Do you deny that it's an...

independent federal agency?

[arcane1]

3. Kick!

:kick:

[westerebus]

4. A lot of folks are in for a shock.

The gold is there.

The BOJ's gold is there.

The Bund's gold is there.

The House of Saud's is there.

The BOE's is there too.

The IMF's is also there.

[dixiegrrrrl]

6. I would be interested in any sources available for that information.

Since there are a lot of conflicting reports about the status, amounts and ownership of Fed. Reserve gold.
Got links for me, please?

[westerebus]

15. It's like this.

When they look, they will find gold.

Gold from the BOJ, the BOE, the Bund, the Saud's and the IMF.

No where in that statement did I mention the USA.

And if the Bernank says it's ours, well then it is.

Just like nuclear weapons. If Gates says we got 5000 of them, then we do.

Could you tell the difference between our gold and anyone else's?

Or the difference between a warhead and a decoy?

Some times you just got to go with the program.

Which would be more of a shock?

No gold or no nukes?

If you trust that one exists why wouldn't the other?

[Po_d Mainiac]

13. +1000 ROFL And lots of great big mirrors! n/t

[westerebus]

16. Oh yea of little faith.

They will find gold there.

Just who it belonged to, well let's just say possession is 9/10's of the law.

;-)

[Art_from_Ark]

30. I have a funny feeling that there hasn't been any gold reserve

since 1971, and that's why Nixon stopped making payments in gold.

Or an alternative theory-- what little gold there was left has been used up gradually since 1982 to produce bullion and commemorative coins.

[westerebus]

38. No that's not the reason.

Alfred Hayes was the President of the FBNY from 1956 to 1975. He gave a lecture and you can read it on line. perjacobsson.org/lectures 1975.

Read it and see what you think. You will get a good feel for the time frame.

[Art_from_Ark]

47. I gave an alternative theory

about the use of gold reserves to make bullion and commemorative coins beginning in 1982 (with the American Arts gold bullion series). That would have started after the lecture you cited. And it could be possible given the government's decision to deplete the strategic silver stockpile around the same time.

[westerebus]

48. 1982 coinage.

If it's minted by the US Government, the metal remains the possession of the US Government. You can hold it, trade it and collect it. US coinage is counted in the FED's reserves.

You are providing a service to the American people by buying American gold and silver coins. In a fiat system, it makes sense to hold reserves in both metals and currencies/bonds as the USD is the world's reserve currency. It also forces other countries to hold USD reserves which lessened our requirement to hold PM's in our reserves.

The theory the gold was not there when Nixon pulled the USD off the gold standard was a good way to sell fear into the PM markets. That hasn't changed in forty years.

Hayes was very explicit in his comments about how inflated PM prices would affect the global economic community. That's one of the reasons Nixon removed the USD off the gold standard. Not so explicit was the development of OPEC and the affect of that cartel would have had on USD swaps of our gold holdings. Or the economic effects of a world wide oil embargo. Consider the price of oil in today's USD's.

Middle of the cold war and all those proxy wars should be considered in relation to American hegemony and USD in 1971. The Berlin Wall and Viet Nam were monuments to economic deprivation in the cause of political fundamentalism. There was no way the US Government was about to give away its position.

Really what's changed? We are actually stronger now then we have ever been. Despite all the BS coming out of the talking heads. All the talking heads.

Is there injustice? Yes. Inequality? Yes. Neo-Corpism? Yes. We are not a Utopian society. We are just going to have to live with that fact. Until, we can change this nation to a Democracy, we've got to use what we got. Our political parties are not functioning in our best interests. But that's a different rant. Sorry for carrying on...

Me. I'm buying PM's and stocks and bonds.

[Art_from_Ark]

49. I disagree with this statement:

"If it's minted by the US Government, the metal remains the possession of the US Government."

Since 1982, the US Government has been vigorously promoting its gold bullion and, later, commemorative coin programs. These coins are not released into circulation but are sold directly to collectors (in the case of commemorative gold coins and special edition/condition gold bullion coins), and through select dealers (in the case of regular bullion coins). The coins are sold at prices far in excess of their face value. Once those coins are sold, Uncle Sam loses title to them. They are no longer his.

[westerebus]

50. I agree.

As far as commemoratives and special editions. Your nusi's version of artworks for the masses.

I don't think the Mint will use up the entire Reserve coining commemoratives.

It's not like there's no PM in American soil. The great American Park System and Wilderness Preserve.



As the Elders of the tribe say: Buy the f'n dip and hold physical.

[Art_from_Ark]

51. Here are some things to consider

How much gold did the US have in reserves after the wave of gold collections ended in the 1930s?
How much gold was added to the reserves through government purchases of mined gold?
How much gold was disbursed as payments to foreign countries between the Bretton Woods Agreement (1944) and Nixon's decree (1971)? This would include several hundred thousand "Aramco" gold slugs that were produced by the Philadelphia Mint to pay for Saudi oil in the 1940s, among others.
What were the actual reserves in 1971? Does anyone have any hard data? (I believe the last actual audit was performed in the late 1950s).
What is the total gold weight of all bullion and commemorative coins that have been made by the various US mints since 1982?
How much of that gold has come from new stocks?

[westerebus]

52. Inquiring minds want to know.

I'm there too. The sooner the audit the better. Show me the physical.

We are of the same mind.

[Art_from_Ark]

53. First bit of data

Since 1980, when the US first began issuing bullion coins*, mint records indicate that more than 20 million ounces (or about 622 metric tons) of gold have been used to produce American Gold Eagle bullion coins (1oz, 1/2oz, 1/4oz, and 1/10oz, in both "business strike" and collector versions) and their predecessors, the American Arts series medals.


*(I had thought it was 1982, but it was actually 1980)

[jody]

27. "FEDERAL RESERVE DIRECTORS: A STUDY OF CORPORATE AND BANKING INFLUENCE"

STAFF REPORT FOR THE COMMITTEE ON BANKING, CURRENCY AND HOUSING HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 94th Congress. Second Session

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=114x85160

[groovedaddy]

34. former Governor Eliot Spitzer said this week that the Fed has turned into a "Ponzi scheme"

that relies on insider dealing and requires vastly increased scrutiny.

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2009/07/26/barofsky