Latest / Man in America Podcast / THE GREAT TAKING: They’re Coming for YOUR Assets—the Sinister Plan Exposed w/ James Patrick

Transcript

THE GREAT TAKING: They’re Coming for YOUR Assets—the Sinister Plan Exposed w/ James Patrick · Man in America Podcast

• 0:13
  Seth Holehouse: Welcome to Man in America, a voice of reason and a world of non man. I'm your host, Seth Mulhouse. So as the host of this show, I find it as part of my responsibility, my mission, my purpose to try to find the stories that I think matter. And not just the stories that are trending or popular or, you know, that are that clickable, but to find the things that I think really, really matter to our future, to the future for our children, the future of our country. And so you if you look at the content library of what I've done, you can see it's like, okay.
• 0:51
  Yeah. Make sure it's it makes sense. Health freedom, you know, geopolitics and economics, exposing all the conspiracies that are now real. But one of the biggest stories I think that doesn't get nearly enough coverage is the idea of the great taking. Now if you're not familiar with what the great taking is, so the origin it was a book and a documentary originally made by a guy named David Webb, who was investment banker in in finance.
• 1:19
  And he basically came across all this legal information that showed that the entire system, the financial system that's managing securities, stocks, bonds, and it goes beyond that, has been legally set up to seize our assets in the event of a financial crisis. So our stocks that we have, our bonds that we own, so many of the assets that we think that we own, when you look into the actual legal writing and legal code, you find out that we don't own them. And in fact, that if there's some sort of financial, you know, crisis that we're kind of last in line to get this and to get this money. And for so for a lot of Americans, you know, they've got their money sitting in four zero one k's or IRA's or pensions thinking that, okay, well, if the stock market goes down 10%, I'll take a loss, but it'll recover. But the real issue is so much bigger than that.
• 2:18
  It's that if there's that that crisis, these financial institutions have first right to these assets, and we're basically last in line so they can literally carry out the great taking. And so my guest today is James Patrick. He's a documentary filmmaker, and he's working, very closely with David Webb. Pretty they just released a new documentary of that in the past month, which we'll show the trailer for in a little bit here, documenting the great taking, what it is, and how we can stop it. And so we're gonna be diving into a lot of more complex financial things.
• 2:53
  So if if you're someone that is not really into finance, maybe this won't be the episode for you, but I think it affects all of us. And so I think it's really important because maybe you're not into finance, but you're into the the banking conspiracy and how the big bankers have, you know, stolen from us, and they they use this wash, rinse, repeat, way of seizing all of our assets. So, again, for you know, even if you're not really a big finance person, I think it's still relevant to you. But we'll be going into a lot of detailed information about how this works, how we can stop it. I'll give you just a quick kind of PG warning that if there's kids around, so my guest, James, he says, I think the s word a few times, you know, there's no f bombs or anything like that, but just giving you a heads up that he does swear a couple of times.
• 3:34
  Like, we don't swear in my household. My kids never hear these words. And so, I feel like it's my responsibility to give you some little warning that, you know, I try to make man in America a a family friendly podcast, but sometimes I have guests that are passionate about things. So, again, just giving you that warning ahead of time. Also, just a reminder that every show I do is done as a podcast as well as a video show.
• 3:53
  So if you listen, you prefer listening to it, go to your favorite podcast app like Apple Podcasts, Spotify, etcetera. You'll find on there a search for Man in America. And just give the show a thumbs up. So if you're watching in Rumble, hit that like or that Rumble button, whatever button they're using these days, because with more likes and rumbles and comments that we get, the more we can reach more, other people as well. So please enjoy the interview.
• 4:16
  Mister James Patrick, it's great to have you back on the show. A lot's happened since our last interview, so I'm looking forward to today's discussion. Thank you for being here.
• 4:25
  James Patrick: Yeah. Thanks for having me. I think it was after the hurricane in September, October.
• 4:30
  Seth Holehouse: Yeah. I think we had to reschedule because you you had lost either power or Internet or some combination of that, you know, before. So because you're in the North Carolina region. Right?
• 4:40
  James Patrick: Yeah. Yeah.
• 4:41
  Seth Holehouse: Yeah. Well, here we are and a lot's changed since then, certainly. So, I'm just gonna dive straight into, the trailer for your documentary that just came out. And so Okay. Instead of trying to give you some big introduction, I'll I'll play the trailer.
• 4:56
  It's about the great taking, which the trailer will explain it, and then I'll get to pick your brain and have you help us to understand what I think is one of the most important issues of our lifetimes, but also an issue that's not that easy to understand. So, it if it's okay with you, I'll just just dive right into the trailer.
• 5:14
  James Patrick: Yeah. That'd be great. Thank you.
• 5:16
  Seth Holehouse: Okay.
• 5:21
  Speaker 3: For four hundred years, securities were personal property. If your account provider, your broker, or your custodian became insolvent, you could take immediate return of your securities. That is no longer the case.
• 5:40
  Speaker 4: America is is in trouble. The Federal Reserve can be summarized in three words. It's a scam. I never realized it was the most profoundly corrupt institution in the world pretending to be honorable.
• 5:59
  Speaker 5: Mister Webb came out with his book and people began to read it and constituents started calling me and saying, what are gonna do about it? And I didn't realize this and I didn't realize that and I can lose everything that I own.
• 6:10
  Speaker 3: So I've written this book The Great Taking to put on the table a very sophisticated structure designed to take essentially all financial collateral globally. In 1994, the UCC, which
• 6:27
  Speaker 6: is the Uniform Commercial Code, changed wording regarding securities. It meant that the stocks that you and I purchase can be used as collateral to guarantee loans for that investment firm.
• 6:41
  Speaker 7: 1994, article eight revision, they created conjured a new type of property ownership or property right called securities entitlement. That's that's a contract. So it isn't, a security in the sense that you thought you used to own something on paper.
• 7:00
  Speaker 8: So you you own securities. You own, you know, the number that says on your brokerage statement, but securities, you know, can be are are are more fungible in that in that respect.
• 7:11
  Speaker 9: I just wanna regurgitate what I think I'm hearing. So given the fact that these securities are in a pool, it they they are using the securities in the pool as collateral, but you don't know necessarily if they're using yours or somebody else's. That's that's my understanding.
• 7:27
  Speaker 3: The financial system, the custodians are empowered to borrow the securities out of the pool without any in any limit at all.
• 7:40
  Speaker 6: Taking that the next step which would mean potentially if your investment firm went bankrupt, your assets could be pledged to that.
• 7:49
  Speaker 3: The secured creditors have absolute assurance that they will keep the client collateral in the event of insolvency. And this is the shocker, not your insolvency, but insolvency of the people that secretly used your securities as collateral.
• 8:09
  Speaker 6: That's insane. That's ridiculous. We all own our own property. I pulled out the book and read the section of code he was talking about, said, I'll be damned. I read that the same way he does.
• 8:22
  So there is a legitimate concern. As individuals, these are our securities. We're not pledging them for any institution. But by god, it's ours.
• 8:31
  Speaker 9: I'm glad that they're bringing this bill and and, you know, and hopefully, we'll make sure that at least the citizens of Tennessee are are, you know, the highest priority when it comes to their assets being protected. And, you know, and if anything happens, god forbid, does, that they'll get their assets back.
• 8:47
  Speaker 3: The derivatives complex, so it gone from a hundred to 700,000,000,000,000 in five years. It's now estimated to be maybe 2 quadrillion.
• 9:00
  Speaker 9: I didn't even know quadrillion was actually a real word. You know, I I thought it was something I made up when I was seven.
• 9:07
  Speaker 3: They don't need your money. They can create unlimited money. It is about subjugation of people. We are in a hybrid war that is open ended.
• 9:20
  Speaker 10: Kissinger said long time ago, if you wanna control people, you control food. If you wanna control nations, you control oil. If you wanna control the world, you control money.
• 9:28
  Speaker 4: So if this what you're using as a monetary value is not your property, You have none. You have nothing. You are a slave. The average person is doomed. They have to wake up.
• 9:42
  They have to learn a little bit about what the real world is about. They have to stop buying into the myth.
• 10:07
  Seth Holehouse: So, there's a lot that was packed into that five minute trailer. I'm gonna give my thirty second basic understanding, and I wanted you to help just explain this in much more detail. Let's just say that I've got a hundred thousand dollars, and I take that and I go put it into the stock market through a TD brokerage, or say I took that money and put it into a Chase savings account, or basically handed it over to one of these big financial institutions to manage. If I understand correctly, those institutions are taking that money and using it on collateral for loans for them to go basically play the, you know, roll the dice and play the stock market or whatever they're doing with it. But if they the key with it being is that if there's a financial crisis, if they become insolvent, they seize those loans.
• 11:03
  So they seize all of my assets that I've given them as their own collateral for their debts. So, basically, that all the people in America that are watching the stock market every day and watching their IRA account, their four zero one k, all these assets that we've trusted it with these institutions that in an event of a financial crisis, those institutions basically take ownership of all of our assets, and we're left with nothing. And like what David Webb, the guy that gentleman in the glasses said, they can print money. They don't need our money. It's about subjugation.
• 11:42
  It's so that they can basically take everything away from us and force us to be serfs. Is that generally an accurate understanding?
• 11:55
  James Patrick: Yeah. Illegal structure has been put in place to that that would result in that in in the event of a widespread crisis. So now when you buy stocks or bonds, I think since since since probably time memorial, since there have been securities, some brokers have just surreptitiously used their client assets. But but, really, I really discovered that in the in the seventies, it became really a widespread practice. And and then in the eighties, bankers are telling me it was like totally hog wild.
• 12:29
  It was like rampant. And then in in the nineties, it was legalized. There were steps made by by the financial industry to change the laws to basically legalize, legalize this unauthorized use of client securities. So they're, like, pledging so, like, in in the in the books and records of of brokers and and then also firms above the brokers, they're they're basically kept all client stocks and bonds are kept in pooled accounts. So you buy your stocks, you know, and they'll be kept in a pooled account at a at the broker level or, like, also, they're kept up many times this many times your broker and custodian just have a bookkeeping entry, and it's kept at a higher level in these clearing clearing trusts.
• 13:16
  Like, the Deposit Trust Clearing Corporation in New York was founded in '9 in 1973. And and then in EU, there's the EuroClear. Was founded in 1968 by JPMorgan. But basically, I think the issue was that as financial firms started to use their client assets like that, they're all lending it out. They're all pledging it.
• 13:40
  They're pledging them for their own bets, they're lending it out to other firms to to pledge as collateral on their bets. So they're taking your stocks and lending it to somebody else to bet on it, make a speculative bet. Now if that bet goes bad, you know, your assets are now tied up in the bankruptcy of somebody else, right? So, it's pledged as collateral to them. So then this issue of priority who has priority, is it the is it the clients and their asset that they have priority to their own property or Or does this other jerk have priority to it?
• 14:12
  Or let's say it's lend out twenty, fifty times, and there's twenty, fifty secondured creditors to each contract that have a priority. The industry faced a problem here. Like, how they can how can they pledge a client's assets if they don't if the client has a has a clear legal claim, particularly, like, with bankruptcy law, that would be considered fraud. If you trade make a transfer before ninety days of bankruptcy, that's constructive fraud. If you didn't pay the person for for the use of their assets, that's fraud.
• 14:43
  So, like, basically, fraud had to be legalized. The bankruptcy code had to be changed. The treatment of of property rights to to securities had to be fundamentally altered to conform and legalize this this what became a common practice that really no one was aware of. I mean, the fact that it's like I talked to bankers in the industry like, hey. How long have you guys been doing this?
• 15:05
  You're really doing this, or how does this work? Like, what do you and they're like, yeah. We've been doing it for a long, long time. You know? And so now it's just become this widespread industry practice.
• 15:14
  And just very few you know, the public isn't aware of this. And even even even, like, top fund managers aren't aren't fully aware of it. The banks doing it are, but but but even, like, I found this, Jim Rickards book aftermath, he talks about giving a presentation to the Morgan Stanley board, and the and the the CEO of the of Morgan Stanley didn't understand the the the the greater risk of what the last thing you talked about of a systemic wide meltdown, that that that sort of baked into the archit the legal architecture of this. So, yeah. Mean, it's a
• 15:55
  Speaker 5: basically,
• 15:57
  Seth Holehouse: when you give your assets to one of these institutions, let's just say, you know, let's just say TD, right, you say you have a TD account and they're managing your IRA, that Mhmm. A lot of people, they they they might let's say they again, they say they have a hundred thousand dollars, and that that hundred thousand dollars is spread across some some bonds and maybe half it's in the stock market and, you know, they've it's in a variety of different places. But I think a lot of people are very focused on the stock market. Like, oh my gosh, Nvidia lost 5% today. And and and, you know Yeah.
• 16:30
  And the the great concern is what if the stock market goes down? Like, we just saw that. You know, with the tariff announcement, we saw the stock market, you know, start being very volatile. You're down 10% today, up 10% the next day, and I think for people that are holding on to that, it's like, you know, sitting in a car that's being shaken in an earthquake and it's like, how long is this gonna last? But I think most people, they don't go beyond the concern of thinking that I will lose some portion of my wealth if the stock market goes down.
• 16:59
  Right? Like, it's it's a very basic idea.
• 17:02
  James Patrick: Right? The risk people think they're exposed to or the the that's what they the perceived
• 17:06
  Seth Holehouse: That's perceived risk. Right?
• 17:08
  James Patrick: They know they're exposed to. Yeah.
• 17:09
  Seth Holehouse: But what I'm getting from this, though, is that, like, that's almost the that's the SIOP, to to believe that that's your perceived risk. Whereas Mhmm. The perceived risk is that if there is some sort of financial event that gets categorized as some level of bad. Right? I'm I'm not sure when and I I wanna learn more about, like, what is it that creates this scenario.
• 17:32
  But the real perceived risk is that you're not gonna say lose 20%. Like, say we hit, like, a a major crisis, an economic crisis, and say the stocks dropped 20% in a week. The risk is not that you lose 20% over the course of that week. The risk is that if that bank becomes insolvent, you know, with their own, you know, debts or whatever happens at that level, that they can take everything. That is not that you lose They
• 17:59
  James Patrick: have the legal rights.
• 17:59
  Seth Holehouse: Literally, they have the legal right to seize every penny that you have trusted them with.
• 18:06
  James Patrick: And Even even if fraud and abuse and constructive fraud, fraudulent transfer have occurred. Yeah. Even if you're there's an insider double dealing on it. So just as as to to give people a real case example to so this they don't just think I'm talking under my ass here is that, like, in the Lehman Brothers case, Lehman Brothers was playing with all of its clients' stocks and bonds. Right?
• 18:29
  And we were leveraging them up, lending them out, rehypothecating, they call them, where you you you post them on one bet, and then and then the the the creditor of that contract then can has control of the of the security then and then can re pledge it again, and then the guy on the next contract and the next contract and the next contract. So you get these same securities get used as collateral in what I've used term like collateral chains, these collateral chains of multiple contract, re hypothecated leveraged contracts again and again and again. So you're getting these I mean, if you have that chart on the pyramid thing that that this is a really dumbed down, overly simplistic, like, diagram. But, basically, in US and Europe, there's, like, a hundred and 30,000,000,000,000 of stocks and bonds, and there's about an estimated 2 quadrillion dollars of derivatives. So from the this is really not this is not imprecise or it's been perfect, like because the value of your of your stocks and bonds are the collateral used on these contracts fluctuates up and down.
• 19:39
  And the risk the risk of the of the bets is also fluctuating. So probably it's much less than it's probably only 30,000,000,000,000 of the hundred and 30 of stocks and bonds being used to back that up, but it's this is just to give you an idea of the proportions. This is kind of showing kind of 15 to one leverage ratio overall in aggregate. But so but, anyway, so the when you have a yeah. That's the the the real the real gold standard of of collateral and derivatives contracts is is like US treasury bonds.
• 20:17
  And that's that's kind of the required collateral to be posted on most of these. So a lot of times, a firm will, like, swap swap this the the stocks for treasuries and then post it then post the treasuries as collateral. So they'll post them, like, what they call an initial margin. So to to activate a derivatives a bet, you need to put down some pony up some money and then act activates the contract. You know, you you put consideration down, and then it's like it's the deal is alive.
• 20:48
  And then the the the creditor of the contract will then have control of it. And then so in the the issue is the issue is that if you wanna pull up the other chart on the US treasuries thing. So the Bank of International Settlements, really the central bank of central banks, in their twenty twenty twenty three quarterly September quarterly report, they they they have the best data on all these derivatives things. So there, they're showing speculative bets on the US treasury futures. And this chart to the right, the c, is showing the levels of of leverage within this this ratio thing on the right.
• 21:30
  So 200 100, two hundred. That's that's one hundred hundred fifty, two hundred times leverage ratio. That's like the gold standard, the most commonly required collateral for derivatives contracts. So when people are buying US Treasuries, just to give you a little kind of buzzkill here, like, when when people buy US Treasury, they're thinking they're buying the best, most secure, you know, investment. Like, I'm getting this, like, really conservative thing.
• 22:00
  It's, you know, it's the most highly liquid, but it's used as collateral because it's the most highly liquid thing, you know, security. So the industry's, you you know, leveraging the crap out of this these things. Between '20 beginning of '20 '18 through the beginning of twenty twenty two, they were leveraging them on average more than a 50 times. Over a 50 times consistently. Do you see that?
• 22:24
  Mean, in the late twenty twenty, early '20 '20 '1, it was breaking 202 times leverage. You know? So the issue is, like, the banks are basically borrowing short term in these, like, US Treasury repo markets. They're not posting their own money. They're posting clients' money, but they're also just borrowing clients' securities short term to cover the collateral requirements like that evening for each contract they have open.
• 22:51
  So there's this, like, robust, you know, repo market every day of of these banks, like, borrowing on the security on the the US treasury repo market. And then they're so that's fine and dandy. Like, I mean, I guess this stuff can works over when when the market's doing alright, when everything's, like, relatively stable, you know, da da da. But the issue is if you get if you start getting a system wide failure and there's all these failures going on, that that that's US treasury repo market, the rental market just dries up, and there's no more collateral to borrow. And then you just you could because you get a blanket failures because there's no not enough damn collateral to go around to cover 50 times leverage.
• 23:33
  I mean, you're talking to ten, twenty, 50, to 50 times. I mean, there's no possibility that all these these contracts can be honored. You know? There's not enough money. It's like it there's not enough collateral out there.
• 23:46
  It sucks. To undergird all these contracts, it has to be rehypothecated again and again and again. If you just start getting these they these BIS papers, they call it like a margin spiral. Like, There's great risk that if the market of the collateral starts to dry up, you get these death spirals, these margin spirals, like, if there's a systemic wide failures, then then you're then you're held at risk of the of the what they call the financial intermediary. That could be your broker or firms above them.
• 24:21
  In the code, they they refer to this term, like, financial intermediaries. So, like, the, you know, industry had to to continue to commit this fraud or, like, really, it shows that as they made these legal changes to the law to to authorize this stuff, the the derivatives market just started growing and growing and growing and growing. And it was a function of legalizing these kind of fraudulent activities that really led to great risk and putting clients at risk of loss. You know? So there was these real fundamental changes made to the bankruptcy code and the UCC article eight.
• 24:59
  Really, film, Stomp at the Great Taking, is about the first efforts in 1990 I mean, in thousand twenty four to change the Uniform Commercial Code to fix these revisions made. So in 1994, the Article eight of the UCC was revised, which is the part that deals with securities. And Uniform Commercial Code is just a body of commercial that that was passed through this uniform co op law commission throughout The United States. It's, like, from the late eighteen hundreds. And it's been widely kinda useful and good.
• 25:32
  I mean, it's just created uniformity of contract law and for trade and stuff. But this is a clear case where where the banking industry abused it and and really perverted property rights. So there was there was two really big things legal things done in this 1994 revision of Article eight. One was they substituted direct ownership in a in a stock or bond, the security, with a contractual claim or on a stock or bond. So now when you buy a stock or bond, you don't hold title to the stock.
• 26:03
  You're just a contractual claimant against your broker, against your financial intermediary. So they call that a securities entitlement. An entitlement you're entitled to a security. You're a contractual claimant. So you're a securities entitlement holder now.
• 26:17
  And then the significance of that is in bankruptcy law, like, let's say, the investor loses your money for you. You know? Now you're not the owner. He didn't really have to pay you back. You're just a contractual claimant against him.
• 26:30
  And and that has very low priority in a bankruptcy proceeding. You're you're just a contractual claimant. The second thing is it said the the code said the secured creditors of the financial intermediary that lost your stocks for you has priority ahead of the entitlement holder. It's very clear in the code. Mean, I could send you another image of that.
• 26:52
  If you look up UCC article 85,511, you'll see it on the Cornell site. So again, they're bringing up this issue of priority bankruptcy. You're a contractual claimant. So let me just give a little analogy for it. Is this it right here?
• 27:12
  No, that's Article 22. Just write Article eight dash five one one. Oh. But then you get so if you get a an analogy would be like, let's say you got a you have a mortgage on your house. The bank of the bank is the secured creditor of the house.
• 27:30
  If you don't pay the so you look at the last sentence in the first paragraph. And the claims of entitlement holders have priority or no actually go if you get down a little bit. See, it says see, it says a and b sound good that, like, oh, entitlement holders have priority. Entitlement holders have priority.
• 27:51
  Seth Holehouse: Claim of the creditor has priority over the claim of the entitlement holder. Right?
• 27:56
  James Patrick: So here they're saying this is referring if the Clearing Corporation does not have sufficient assets to satisfy the obligations of all the entitlements. That's kind of referring to these higher pools like Deposit Trust Clearing Corporation who have securities and settlements with respect to financial assets and its obligations through creditor or claim provision, who has security interest in the financial asset, the claim of the creditor has priority over the claim of the settlement holders. So they're saying, like, you don't you as the you as the stockholder whose stocks were played with at these higher levels in the system, you don't you don't have priority in in in the in the case of bankruptcy. And then they said, okay. So the the analogy would be like, you own you bought a house with a loan.
• 28:35
  Your bank has a lien lien on the house. They're the secured credit of the home. But you also you also owe, like, the painter some money and the on all these contracts you signed, the roofer, the carpenter, the bricklayer, whatever. Yo, golly's open balances and all these contracts. You go bankrupt.
• 28:51
  You can't pay anymore. The bank takes the house. They're clear clear owner. They have clear priority. They got they went and got they perfected legal certainty through filing.
• 28:59
  You know? But you own all the all these other guys' money. Well, they're they're shit out of luck if you don't have the money. I mean, they're they're just like they gotta, like, show up in bankruptcy court, they have these they gotta compete with each other, but they have this real low priority. They so secured creditor always has priority over a contractual claim.
• 29:16
  So they they perverted this law and and put the real owner. They switched the legal relationship. You as the owner of the stock should have priority, and the jerks playing with it after should be contractual claim. It's not the other way around. You know?
• 29:27
  Seth Holehouse: And so So so looking at, like, the the derivatives market. Right? Because if we get into this and and and understand this because you you mentioned before that they're leveraged one, two hundred times, right? So meaning that let's just say, okay, I take a hundred thousand dollars, I give it to a, you know, TD Bank, right? Or, you know, for the for, you know, kind of they're gonna manage that money in the stock market for me, they're gonna buy some stocks or whatever.
• 29:52
  I I no longer own that stock anymore. Right? I'm just I'm an I'm an entitlement. I have an entitlement to the stocks. But legally, basically, they're the owner of stocks.
• 30:00
  But if they take that money, America is under siege. You've seen the headlines, Terror attacks, chaos, and whispers of coordinated threats. Intelligence insiders and whistleblowers are sounding the alarm. For years, the border has been wide open, allowing dangerous groups of terrorists, cartels, even foreign soldiers to infiltrate our nation. The deep state doesn't want you prepared.
• 30:25
  And even with Trump coming back in charge, smooth sailing certainly is not guaranteed. Experts are warning us disruptions are coming. Chaos is just around the corner. Think about it. What would you do if another pandemic hits or if our grid goes dark or if coordinated attacks erupt across our country overnight?
• 30:44
  Right now is the time to act while you still can. Your family's survival depends on having a secure food supply. That is why Heaven's Harvest exists. Heaven's Harvest offers the highest quality long term stor storable food, delicious, nutritious, and designed to last up to twenty five years. Imagine the peace of mind knowing that you have three, six, or even twelve months of food ready for any emergency.
• 31:11
  Don't wait for the shelves to go empty or for the next attack to catch you off guard. Take control now. Go to heavensharvest.com and secure your supply. Use promo code Seth, it's s e t h for an exclusive 15% discount on your entire order. Picture this, your family is safe, secure, and well fed while chaos unfolds outside.
• 31:35
  That security starts today. Heaven's harvest because tomorrow isn't promised. Protect your family by preparing today. Visit heaven'sharvest.com right now and use promo code Seth to save 15% off. Don't wait until it's too late.
• 31:51
  Your family is depending on you. And they then load it out again, or they use that money to get to access more funds. So they might might use a hundred thousand dollars in collateral that I've given them to actually take out, you know, say $10,000,000, right? Because they don't need to use it one for one, right? It's it's like a loan, you know, you don't you're not forced to put 80% down on a house purchase, you put 10% down, right?
• 32:14
  So then they're doing that, and they're getting all the other money, but then it keeps getting loaned out again and again and again, sometimes 200 times, which is what builds that derivatives market. And actually, so I wanna, play
• 32:27
  James Patrick: No. It's similar to, like, fractional reserve banking, I think, where it's not the may not be the same firm doing it over and over internally. It could be also through the industry. So in fractional reserve banking, if the bank has a 10% reserve rate, you put $1,000 in the account, They loan out 900, and then the next bank that gets the check, they can loan out 80 8800 10 and 720. And so and the result, if for the 10% reserve rate is the thousand becomes 10,000.
• 32:57
  Seth Holehouse: I see.
• 32:57
  James Patrick: It's it's it's being led pledged around and around in by in in these chains of different actors, you know, in the market.
• 33:05
  Seth Holehouse: So I'm gonna play a
• 33:07
  James Patrick: Could be me me one firm, but there's the industry as a whole is leveraging it up like that.
• 33:10
  Seth Holehouse: I see. So I'm gonna play a quick section from the big short movie, which helped me understand derivatives Okay. And and how that works. Because when I remember I saw this movie, it really helped make sense of it with the with the casino scene. So I'll play this really quickly because and I hope I found the right one, while you were talking, but I think this, to me, helps illustrate a little bit, like, what kind of gambling these banks are doing.
• 33:30
  So I'll play this.
• 33:30
  Speaker 5: Okay. So here's how a synthetic CDO works. Let's say I bet 10,000,000 on a blackjack hand.
• 33:36
  Speaker 11: 10,000,000 because this hand is meant to represent a single mortgage bond. Okay. Selena has a pretty good hand here showing 18. Dealer showing seven. That's a really good hand for Selena.
• 33:51
  Good odds. In fact, her chances of winning this hand are 87%.
• 33:55
  Speaker 5: So my odds are good. I'm on a winning streak. Everybody in this place wants to get in on the action. How could I lose? Right?
• 34:03
  Speaker 11: Now this is a classic error. In basketball, it's called the hot hand fallacy. A player makes a bunch of shots in a row. People are sure they're gonna make the next one. People think whatever's happening now is gonna continue to happen into the future.
• 34:17
  During the real estate boom, markets were going up and up, and people thought they would never go down.
• 34:22
  Speaker 5: So people who are watching and think that I won't lose will make a side bet. Now this is the first synthetic CDM. I love Selena Gomez. Bet you 50,000,000 she wins, and I'll give you three to one odds.
• 34:34
  James Patrick: Three to one odds?
• 34:36
  Seth Holehouse: Okay. I'll take that bet.
• 34:38
  Speaker 11: Now somebody else is gonna wanna make a bet on the outcome of their bet.
• 34:43
  Speaker 5: 50,000,000 she wins.
• 34:44
  Speaker 11: That will lead to synthetic CDO number two.
• 34:47
  James Patrick: Hey. I bet you 200,000,000,
• 34:49
  Speaker 5: that lady in the glasses wins that bet. She probably will win. So I won great payoff.
• 34:55
  Speaker 12: How about 21?
• 34:57
  Speaker 5: Deal. And this will go on and on with more and more synthetic CDs.
• 35:03
  Speaker 11: And we can transform an original $10,000,000 investment into billions of dollars. You okay? No.
• 35:15
  Speaker 8: I actually feel pretty sick.
• 35:22
  Speaker 11: So I'm going to leave.
• 35:25
  Speaker 5: You think I'm a parasite, don't you, mister Wong? But apparently, society bevards me very much. In fact, let's do this. I'll tell you how much I'm worth. You tell me how much you're worth.
• 35:43
  Speaker 8: God, you are an incredibly big piece of shit.
• 35:53
  Seth Holehouse: So, anyway, so, obviously, that's a little bit different, but to me, that was what helped me understand derivatives and how you can take some form of money, and then you have all these financial institutions using that money as the origin. And so going back to the, this chart here, like, that's how you can go from a hundred and 30,000,000,000,000 in global securities. Right? You know, all the money that's tied up in markets and bonds, etcetera, And somehow you get this 2 quadrillion dollar derivative market. So is that I I know it's a little bit of a different, but I'm kinda using, you know, one principle to kinda show another principle.
• 36:27
  Is that a a general idea of of showing how we've got this massive derivatives market?
• 36:33
  James Patrick: Yeah. Yeah. It's not a bad not a bad, like, way of looking at it. I mean so the the the name derivative just means it's a you're you're it's a speculative it's a contract speculating in the price movement of of something else derived from the price movement of a real thing, not then the contract isn't betting to set isn't settling in in gold or dollars or yen. It's saying, like, it's saying, I'm I'm betting the price of the yen will go up.
• 36:57
  I'm betting the price of gold will go down. These are derivatives contracts of yen or gold. So they're yeah, these guys in the scene, they're they're they're speculating on the movements of of these other instruments. So I think the the issue here is that in in of, you know, I'm I'm like a economic historian of financial bubbles throughout history, and I'm writing a book on it now. But but they're basically whenever we've seen these kind of speculative booms fueled by the use of other people's money surreptitiously or or just a lot of speculative contracts about things that aren't real.
• 37:33
  You know, just the in seventeen twenties, there was John Law in the France had the Mississippi bubble, and there was, like, the, you know, the South Sea bubble. There were, like, the two of the periods. Yeah. There's been there's been many of these throughout history, and then they're always fueled by speculation on things that they like, it's it's, and France is speculating on, like, you know, landing in Louisiana and Mississippi they hadn't they owned, but they hadn't been to. No one even went over there.
• 38:00
  Like, it was just some some place near you, like, speculating on. It'd be like if we there's a speculative boom on real estate on the moon, but we've never been there. You know? Or not or we're not, like, actively on the moon, you know, like, settling things and developing the resources. So or in this case, it's, like, fueled by just this this expansion of credit or or this expansion of the industries using everyone's property to post on all these bets.
• 38:25
  So it's just concerning that this is if if if history will serve us any less than that, these things usually don't end well. You know? They they lay to a speculative boom followed by a bus because because these things can't go on forever and their behavior gets crazy. You know, when people use their own money on a bet, they're more prudent. You know?
• 38:45
  If if I if I have to put up my own money down on a contract, I'm gonna be a little bit more discerning and be more discriminating about what the hell I'm doing than if than if I'm, like, just, you know, playing with everyone else's money and there's just no limits to it. So, so the next anyway, so the biggest the first thing was this the the huge landmark thing was this 1994 revision of article a. There were some changes in article nine as well. Then there sorry. I have a bit of a cold.
• 39:16
  But then there's in two then in Europe, the same structure as the article the the entitlement holder priority issues were were conformed into EU law over it took a lot longer, like ten years between 02/2004 and 02/2014. And they're they're it is a little more complicated. There's all these different countries, different constitutions of property sacred. But I mean, it was interesting when the EU started to form these to start that process of getting this stuff legalized in Europe. Like, they created this group called the Legal Certainty Group.
• 39:50
  And to to give the industry legal certainty to steal your shit if they lost it. So that's what they meant by legal certainty to the industry to have total clarity to play with your stuff. So they they they wrote a letter to the Federal Reserve lawyers saying, hey. Could you clarify some of these points? And then, you know, asking very in clear plain language like, do entitlement holders have priority ahead of the secured creditors, or or do the secured creditors have priority of the settlement holders?
• 40:23
  And even in case segregated accounts, are are the are the assets really segregated? And they said the Federal Reserve lawyer says no. Segregated accounts are always at risk of loss of the intermediary, the collapse of the financial intermediary. So anyway, so then the next big thing was like they had, in 02/2005, you know, bankruptcy law proposed a real legal obstacle to all this because there's I could I could pull up these things. But, basically, you can't you can't double deal.
• 40:54
  You can't have an insider. You can't transfer the assets ninety days before bankruptcy or a year if there is an insider relationship. You have to pay someone to use their money. Otherwise, let's say you have a service agreement with your broker. He's playing with it, but he's taking your stocks on the eve of bankruptcy, and he didn't even pay you for the use of it.
• 41:19
  You could negate the service agreement that may have allowed that say, look, this is constructive fraud. It didn't matter if we had an agreement. This guy screwed me. Could recover in a bankruptcy court. So in bankruptcy, there was this 02/2005 bankruptcy law that made provisions to change broaden for the safe harbor provision.
• 41:42
  So it's like that to give people safe harbor that that your that the assets could be kept. You know? In in in the event of bankruptcy, certain assets can be safe to be kept, you know, by the secured creditors. And there and then then there was also the 02/2006 Financial Netting Act that that created all these exceptions, basically, to to the fraudulent transfer issue. So in the Lehman Brothers case, you know, the judge says in that case, know, Lehman was Lehman was lending out all the assets, and JPMorgan was their custodian of the of their clients' securities.
• 42:22
  And then they were also the secured creditors of the derivatives contracts. So that's that's a case of insider relationship because they're they're they should be the custodian keeping safekeeping of them, then they're also taking it as the the secure creditor. So all these these customers of Lehman who's had Lehman had their stocks and bonds with Lehman sued j p, JPMorgan to get their money back their their securities back. And the the the judge says, you know, the real essence of this decision is is do, does JPMorgan say, yeah, the JPMorgan argued, oh, well, look. The safe harbor provisions allow us to keep it now.
• 43:04
  Even in the case of fraud, we can keep these securities. And and and the judge says, oh, well, well, that's clearly correct. And and these these other five forty six exceptions from this 02/2006 act clearly exempt all these fraudulent behavior. They literally went into the casebook definition of fraud and then exempted it out of the bankruptcy code. So it's it's literally just a straightforward cut and dry legalization of fraud.
• 43:35
  So, I mean, this this this stuff is really just unbelievable. I mean, it's just it's it's sort of like it stretches your imagination to think that just so you can that the law anyway, fraud could just be legalized like that and and that all of us could be put at risk to such an extent.
• 43:50
  Seth Holehouse: I mean, it's crazy, but, unfortunately, if you look at the recent USAID uncoverings and and so much of what we now know about how the world works and how the the people who have control over these institutions and and us and the money supply, how they work, and it's it's like it was it was set up for as fraud from day one. Right? The original thing of deceiving saying, okay. You know, you have nothing. I will lend you a dollar, but you owe me a dollar 10 back.
• 44:16
  It's like, well, I will never be able to make that extra 10¢ to give you back. So from the very get go, it's a system that was meant to enslave us. We we you could never get out from under that. And so, I wanna bring this this chart back up again because this to me, this is just mind blowing. So the global securities market by representing, you know, primarily stocks and bonds, hundred and 30,000,000,000,000.
• 44:38
  All these people that have their money sitting in securities, stocks and bonds, they've they've been told that this is the best place to store your money. It's it's it's a good store of value. You're gonna hey, wow, you're gonna earn 9% annually on this particular financial instrument. But the real thing, though, is that if it was just a global securities market and there's no derivatives market, that's one thing. But there's a bomb next to the global derivatives market on the graph.
• 45:06
  And I'm guessing that what that represents is the fact that that entire $2,000,000,000,000 thing, it's almost like a planet in the Death Star is, like, focused right on it. At any at any point, that $2,000,000,000,000 bubble, which is probably the biggest fight the biggest bubble in the history of mankind is, like, the the current bubble that we have with this derivatives market. Yeah. And so that thing, if that breaks, everybody that has any of their assets in securities, like, everybody meaning that the common person that you and me and our friends, our family, etcetera, pension funds, etcetera, that all of those assets get seized by the financial institutions. And that's why David Webb has called this the great taking.
• 45:57
  Right?
• 45:59
  James Patrick: Yeah. Yeah. They're they, 're in a it's it's basically like an unrealized an unrecognized, unknown risk that that investors face. Like you said, you think you're just you think you're just at risk of the of the stock lowering. You know?
• 46:14
  But you're actually at risk of of all these intermediaries up your against your broker's risk of failure and all these intermediaries up the chain. So there's there's one thing called the there's a private association called the Securities Investors Protection Corporation, SIPC, that does offer a $250,000 insurance to be able to lose stocks from their firm from their intermediaries. But their capitalization is only, like, $7,000,000,000 or $10,000,000,000 or some it's some some measly amount within the fund. So when you when you're talking about a hundred and $30,000,000,000,000 market of securities and you got an insurance fund, you know, like so when we went to Tennessee State House, they said, oh, you know, no. We're not you know, you property right, the banker lobbies, this member of the Guggenheim family, they're related to the Rothschilds back.
• 47:04
  This guy, Andy Guggenheim showed up. He's like, no, no. Have insurance. We're not your property rights are good. You still have a claim to your property.
• 47:12
  And, and there's this insurance. You know, there's an insurance. So in case in case we do lose it, which we just said we wouldn't, but no. And, know and then this so, anyway, just it's dramatically underfunded. You know?
• 47:25
  And, I mean, the story gets worse and worse and worse. That's why I'm writing this monthly report on that because it's just you know, there's also these entities above the derivatives complex sorry, above the the central securities depositories of, like, DTCC and EuroClear called central clearing counterparties. So after after the two thousand eight crisis, the regulator said, oh, look. The derivatives market is so dangerous. There's all these crazy people, you know, doing all these bets.
• 47:52
  So why don't we centralize the whole thing and put force all the derivatives contracts to occur through these CCPs, these central clearing counterparties? And they're like so now now they they now now, like, DTCC and Euroclear on these central clearing counterparties above them, and all the derivatives contracts are clear through there. And now, like, when you I don't wanna get too confusing here, but when you bet when you bet on a driver, you always have a counterparty. There's always someone on the other side of the contract that also post this post an initial margin collateral. And if the market goes against them, they have to put up more collateral.
• 48:26
  If it goes against you, you have to put up more collateral or you get wiped out. But now there aren't counterparties to contracts. Your counterparty, the central clearing counterparty, centralized them in these monolithic agents and organizations. The issue is like, they're also underfunded. They have only $10,000,000,000 of, like, funding, and they're clearing trillion hundred trillions of dollars of of, of of contracts through through them.
• 48:57
  And the issue is they're really controlled and owned by their members. DTCC, these higher level entities, you know, housing the securities and and clearing them, they they they're beholden to their members, you know, to the guy the the big too biggest too big to fail banks that own their own them. So they can kinda force them to take a contract that they wouldn't have otherwise. Even if there's not a counterparty, they could just say, you know, that's where you get into this really risky situation where the regulators under the argument that, oh, this is reducing risk, you know? This will reduce systemic risk.
• 49:28
  It's retardive. It's creating it monolithic. Then they even say in all these documents, oh, we're not DTCC's like, well, we're not going to oh, it's only $5,000,000,000 in the CCP. It's clearing $300,000,000,000,000 But we don't want to what if it fails? Well, we don't want to put more money in that one.
• 49:49
  We'll just fund a replacement CCP when that one fails. But if that if the central clearing counterparty fails, all the derivatives contracts go bad. There's no counterparty on on behind any contract if that occurs. So then you're then you're talking about a systemic wide meltdown. I mean and they say, oh, let's just prefund a new one, and then not and then, like and and they're so they're planning for that one they're planning for the the system to collapse and not to make the system that's in place work.
• 50:17
  And then they're saying, oh, well, this is to reduce risk and because that's better for our members. So it's like right there in black and white in all their documents. I mean, I know this stuff might sound like Chinese, but it's like it's it's you go through the documents, it it never ends, and it just goes on and on and on. And then there's these trilateral, high level planning exercises between The UK financial authorities in The UK, US, and EU that are basically going through these kind of event two zero one type planning scenarios of cross border clearing resolution in cases of systemic crisis. So you also have all these planning sessions of the top financial regulators planning for this big collapse and making sure everyone's properly briefed and exercised on what to do.
• 51:06
  So it's just suspicious behavior. It's not the behavior of mature parties. The regulators are weakening their property rights to our stocks. They're allowing industry to go nuts. And then they're planning for collapses.
• 51:26
  And that's why you reach the conclusion after going through all this stuff that this is not just one dumb thing after another. It's like a concerted effort to create DTCC in 'seventy three, dematerialize all the stocks, get them in pooled form, undermine the property rights to them, create these bigger and bigger risks. They use the next crisis. They use Lehman to then get the CCPs in place. You know, safe harbor, the changes in bankruptcy law were done just before that in 02/2005 and '6.
• 51:55
  '70 of this crash. Eight, it's used to to get you know, in 02/2009, they use it for the central clearing counterparties. Like, so the anyway, it's it's very worrisome and, makes you not wanna buy stocks for bonds.
• 52:07
  Seth Holehouse: Oh, I mean, certainly. That's what I'm thinking too is that and I know that, you know, I'll kinda put a little disclaimer that, like, this isn't an episode that's intended to give financial advice. Right? Neither of us are financial advisers. That's not what we're doing.
• 52:19
  But that's one question I have is it's like, okay. Well, for a lot of people that are watching this that have money sitting in stocks and bonds, there's, I guess, two questions. One question is, is there any way to take those stocks and bonds and convert them into some form that does give me direct ownership of them? Like, could I request physical like, I wanna hold the actual titles, you know, or the actual paper
• 52:41
  James Patrick: Yeah.
• 52:41
  Seth Holehouse: For those. Or the the other thing too is that, you know, if money is not safe in those places, where is it safe? Because I know that, you know, even looking at keeping money in in your savings account, well, if there's a bank run, as we saw with, you know, at Silicon Valley Bank, those people lost a lot of their money. Now similar to the insurance you mentioned before, how it's so underfunded, well, the FDIC, everyone says, oh, I go to my bank, and it says FDIC insured for up to, you know, quarter million dollars. Well, if you look at the funding of the FDIC versus the overall I I forget what it was.
• 53:13
  Maybe it's something like 8 to trillion 8 to $10,000,000,000,000 in what should be insured by the FDIC. Yet the FDIC, after they emptied out their their coffers for the SVP collapse, that they've maybe got less than 1% of that. So even the idea that the money is safe in your savings account because it's all it's FDIC insured, like, maybe the first one person Yeah. You know, one person of a hundred that gets in line first gets his money out. So, yeah, I guess it's still gonna two part question.
• 53:43
  Is there a way to convert stocks and bonds into something that we do own? We can have a hold hold, you know, physical possession of, or b, like, where are our assets safe? Is it just kinda is the only thing that's safe, like, the the hunk of silver that you that you hold your as your asset? I mean, like like, do people do?
• 54:02
  James Patrick: Pretty much. I mean, yeah, you give gold or silver like that, you you, you know, and you don't get screwed on some broker with some crazy commission on some of these shows. I heard these horror stories. I remember these these gaming guys selling, you know, like, you know, huge commissions. But but, yeah, if you go to the biggest broker if you go to the biggest gold dealers, like, they got the lowest price.
• 54:22
  But gold and silver, you're not really investing it. You're you're you're saving it. You're Storing. You're preventing loss. You know?
• 54:28
  You're you know, gold gold in 2020 was worth 2,000. Now it's 3,000. I mean, we've seen a 50% inflation. It's it's really just basically you're holding your money's value. You're not people think, oh, gold's going up.
• 54:41
  Gold's not going up. The dollar's going down. That's that's it's to be clear about it. So when you buy gold, you're not investing. You're you're saving your money and and protecting it from loss.
• 54:51
  You know? It's not making you money. It's just saving you money. But, yeah, gold gold are things you have clear title to. Land land are physical assets that you have clear title to.
• 55:02
  You know, land and land and property is a little tricky because you have the property taxes if if you have a, you know, you know, if you have a even let's say you have a twenty nine nineteen twenty nine South crash and you can't you don't have any cash flow more and you can't pay your property taxes, you could lose that. But, as far as securities, you can the the the fact that you if you can get your physical share certificates of your stocks or bonds, and then you have clear title. I think in European Union and a lot of countries, that's no longer possible. But in US, you can request the physical share certificate, and then you're taking it, like, out of this dematerialized form, and you have physical shares, your name. Traditionally, you'd have it recorded on the books of records of the company that issued the stock.
• 55:48
  That's how it used to work for all these things. All the stock certificates, share bonds, you'd buy a bond or a stock, and it was on the record of the company that issued that security. But then industry lobbied to basically do what they call dematerialize the stock. They would eliminate these paper certificates. Because you go to your broker and you're like, Oh, I want to sell this stock.
• 56:16
  So I have to sign over this the ownership of the stock to the broker temporarily as a custodian, then he is allowed to play with it or not play with it, but be the custodian of it on the market, buy or sell it on your behalf. But they argued, Oh, in 1968, there was this paperwork crisis. This is like a hell of a lot of paperwork having to sign all these things, the clients having to sign each certificate each time. So they used that as the argument five years later to create this deposit trust clearing corporation in New York in 1973, where they would keep all the stocks and bonds in one place, you know, under one house, when dematerialized from these vast pools. But, yeah, you can get the physical share certificates.
• 57:00
  I think that what that doesn't so, yeah, just to give you an idea, there's, I think, eighty seven trillion of stocks and bonds in in US at Deposit Trust Cleaning Corporation. And I've seen an article saying there's about $700,000,000,000 worth of stocks and bonds in The US in paper form, in dematerialized certificate form. And I found some articles saying, Oh, how do dematerialize the last $700,000,000,000 worth? So think about it, that's not really a lot. Dollars 700,000,000,000 isn't a lot.
• 57:26
  But but that doesn't really protect you from this systemic wide margin spiral kind of meltdown type scenario because then all the value is gonna drop of of the market. You're living in a in a toilet. Everyone's poor and begging and and stuff. I mean, it's like so, no, you might still have your stocks and bonds, but they're not worth very much. Or and, also, another challenge with that is so when you if you if you call your broker and you're like, I want my share certificates.
• 57:57
  So you can't do that with any funds. Any IRAs, pension funds, mutual funds, they don't issue any share certificates. So 95% of the market, you can't do that. They're all pooled. They're they're forced to dematerialize.
• 58:08
  All the funds. Everything. So, basically, most people cannot even do that. Only if you're an individual person and you own individually some stocks and bonds with your broker, then you can do that. But not if you're not if you have pension fund, IRA, mutual fund, all this stuff, you can't do it.
• 58:23
  You can't get the underlying share certificate of the fund and then the underlying securities under it. So you could, I suppose, get share certificates of companies that would wear well through such a scenario. Like, in the Great Depression period, wealthy families that had their money in, like, gold stock, gold mining certificate. It's a company shared. Like, the you know, those those companies never stop operating even through whatever crisis.
• 58:52
  People need gold. They need to get it on the ground. That's an example I've heard of that could be a decent investment. But I think it's important people realize that we really need to face this up and face this down and do something about it, because this is such a violation of property and our rights and just creates this feudal system. I mean, I'm arguing in these papers and these reports I'm writing that basically, it's of the creation of a new legal, of a new feudal system.
• 59:30
  They're saying the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy decision. The judge said, clearly, J. P. Morgan is a member of the protected class and should keep the client assets. And that's a concerning use of language, that they're a protected class of too big to fail banks that deserve a different legal treatment than everybody else.
• 59:58
  That's feudalism. That's like granting a class of bankers a privilege above the rest, to commit fraud and abuse, take your assets. They don't have to give you anything for them. They can just lose them for you and take them. So this needs to be corrected.
• 1:00:17
  And the way we have we have actually a pretty decent way to do it by amending this UCC code on the state level. I think on the federal level, we'd have to get the two thousand five and six changes to bankruptcy law undone because that's you can't legalize fraud. But the Uniform Commercial Code Article eight was originally passed on the local level, and we can fix it at the state level. So that was back to the film. This was what that film was about, the first legal efforts to do that.
• 1:00:47
  I think some lawyer in North Dakota read David's book, and within a few months, we had a bill introduced in South Dakota and Tennessee. So here you can see that this is real. It got into a hearing. People heard about it. It got discussed.
• 1:01:04
  Now it's been defeated. This year in 02/2005, it was introduced in 12 states or more. People were not calling in and putting pressure on the reps, so the bankers did defeat all these bills. But I think from what I learned going to the state houses and and meeting the reps and that that they do really care a lot of them. A lot of them are, like, paid 30,000 a year to spend four months of their year, which doesn't cover the expenses of, like, the travel and the hotels and the dinners of just being a representative.
• 1:01:35
  These people are really paying their own time to be state rep. Do really care. I'm from Washington, DC, and the federal congressmen are a complete horse. They will not talk to you unless you're paying them for some money. You know, it's like, you know, you gotta rent.
• 1:01:51
  It's like a a a hotel or a a hooker. You have to rent the time. You know, you're like, you know, oh, I don't know. I can't this is not in front of free here. You know?
• 1:01:59
  I have $2,000,000 to raise for this campaign every two years. You know what? I don't I can't just talk to every
• 1:02:04
  Seth Holehouse: Hooker's a good a good word. A good analogy there. One.
• 1:02:08
  James Patrick: They're like, hey. No. But here, I can't just we'll talk. You gotta pay for the time. But it's just like they really don't care.
• 1:02:17
  I tell you, federal politicians are duplicitous. Really just couldn't give a shit. But these state representatives, noticed they were like real people. Sometimes they're a little weird or why are they doing this for free? It's like they're really we could walk into any of their offices and talk to them and say, hey, look, I got this issue or I care about this.
• 1:02:37
  And they'll do it. We get 10,000 people in one state calling up their offices I know in South Dakota, like, several thousand people called, and the and the bill got into onto the floor. You know? In Tennessee, we got through several subcommittees, senate committee. And then in the full committee, they they killed it.
• 1:02:54
  But the the the bankers are using all these arguments like, know, these they're just trying to confuse the matter and bring bring up other issues that weren't weren't true. They said, oh, well, you know, clients couldn't have a margin account in Tennessee if you enacted this bill, which is nonsense. It's like if you had a clearer property right to the security, it would be even better collateral to post than just posting contractual claims to a security. And then they they they really just put pressure on it. So they lied.
• 1:03:25
  They said, oh, you know, this has been standard. Everyone knows this is going on. No one knows this is going on. You know? It's crazy.
• 1:03:34
  Seth Holehouse: So what can so okay. I'll I'll pull up the the website, which is, thegreattakingreport.com. In terms of what people can do, right, what kind of actionable, you know, you know, tasks or whatever people can be doing, I'd say one is is watch the film, thegreattakingreport.com. I'll make sure that link is in the description. What if people wanna contact their local representatives, or anybody else they have access to?
• 1:04:01
  Are there is there a place where there's there's resources or, you know, someone that can hold their hand and walking through that process? Because I know for a lot of people, it's it's confusing to what do I do? What do I do? Who do I call? What do I say?
• 1:04:13
  So what's your what's your homework for Bill that are watching this?
• 1:04:17
  James Patrick: Okay. Well, that's I'm I'm I'm gonna put a button here saying how to act now with this. Because yeah. Because, well, we got these these lawyers in South Dakota. They it's trunorthpublicpolicy.com.
• 1:04:28
  It's TRU, North. And they they they they write these bills. They'll write the bills for your state representative. Let's see. I'll put a button too where you can look up your exact state representative because there's a little a website I found where you can where you can just, like, find who your state rep is.
• 1:04:46
  Because you you can't just call any old rep in the in the building. It's really, you should be calling the one that represents your area, and they'll they'll they will talk to you. So so if you go yeah. I think you just gotta look up your rep, say, hey. Call him up and be like, I've heard that all my stocks and bonds are at risk.
• 1:05:03
  Article a needs revising. And then these guys, true to the public policy, will will explain the issue better to the state representative and write the legislation for them. And David, myself, or these lawyers, they can testify in the hearings against the bankers on this. It's just people need to just put the pressure on it and not feel like they're just some big victim, and there's nothing you can do about it. This is different than all these other crazy stories like, I don't know, the crap in the sky or the shit in the water or the food or, I don't know, all these other crazy, scary stories we talk about in our work.
• 1:05:51
  This is something that's very clear. It's very well documented. It's in black and white. It's in court decisions. It's in the code.
• 1:05:57
  We can clearly refer to it. And then we got a legal team in place that will write the bill for the state reps. We have a clear legal path to fix this. So if we can get that done where, let's say, one state you saw how the code was written. Said, you have property rights.
• 1:06:14
  You have property rights. Accept all the time when you don't. Like that's five eleven eight five eleven. So really just really, the the legal approach we have is just to strike these exceptions. Like, you just strike that exception off the end of c.
• 1:06:29
  And you say, well, now that now it's saying you have priority. You have priority. Accept all the time when you don't. That's what it's saying. You just strike these exceptions there, and then the then the bankers, they have to argue, oh, well, no.
• 1:06:42
  We need these exceptions. You know? So it's like this is actually the way the code was written in this sneaky way, there's, like, three places where it's like that. You have property rights. You have property rights, except all the time when you don't.
• 1:06:53
  And so it's it's just by striking these exceptions, it unravels the protection they've they've got in the state. That wouldn't just change overnight everyone's agreement. The agreement would still be like it was after this was passed in one state. But then large investment firms or custodians or whatever, like a pension fund manager in that state could now demand from his financial firm, you know, they just changed the laws here. I want the new contract to be not under law of New York, but under the law of Tennessee, for example.
• 1:07:28
  And then if it was placed under the law of Tennessee, probably a little investor couldn't do that, but, like, a a a fund manager could. Then then once they write the contract after these legal changes are made to Article A in that state, once they rewrite the contract in that state, then then they would be protected. And then they'd have a clear legal claim in the case that it was lost in bankruptcy, further out the chain. So the market we could put in these in these, correct the property rights, then that would drive the the market participants would drive the the unraveling of that. Then the then the the the the tourist market would have to sort of, like, wind down.
• 1:08:09
  And and and that's that's very possible and easy to do. And even documents from all these financial regulators or financial authorities have, in the last four years, have been ordering the derivatives and players to wind it down a bit. They're saying we'd like to see you wind these these ratios down to more reasonable levels. So that's that is exact that is possible, and that that evidence is that the regulators are saying that. You know?
• 1:08:36
  Seth Holehouse: Okay. So basically, so so as as big and scary as this is, which it is, there are things that can be done. There there's two different links we we discussed to make sure those are in the description. I think the biggest one, is just education, and that's it. And that's what I look at with almost everything, and that's why I'm doing what I'm doing is that we have to get more people aware of these issues because it's really the only way we can create change that's lasting, you know, both at the local level, the state level, the federal level is to, you know, if if you wanna change the federal level, get 10,000,000 people to do something.
• 1:09:08
  State level, get 10,000. Your local community, get a hundred people to show up somewhere, and you'll create change. So that's what we have to to do with this. So, James, I appreciate your time. I appreciate this discussion.
• 1:09:19
  Thank you for doing what you're doing. I know that this is kind of a David versus Goliath scenario, but, you know, there's there's so many examples in history where the Davids have won, so we have to, you know, keep keep pushing at this.
• 1:09:36
  James Patrick: Yeah. I think the the the motto in the beginning of the film is is what the the truth is like a lion. It doesn't need to defend itself. You set it free. Then it free defends itself.
• 1:09:48
  Yeah.
• 1:09:49
  Seth Holehouse: Yeah. Yeah. Yep. I think it was Saint Augustine. Right?
• 1:09:52
  That that that was
• 1:09:52
  James Patrick: Saint Augustine. Yeah.
• 1:09:53
  Seth Holehouse: Yeah.
• 1:09:54
  James Patrick: Yeah.
• 1:09:55
  Seth Holehouse: Well, that's it. Well, again, thank you for your time. It's always a pleasure speaking with you.
• 1:10:00
  James Patrick: Okay. You too. Yeah. And people can find the film at the greattakingreport.com and and also this, if you're if you're a sophisticated investor or something, and one of a real technical breakdown of all the laws, write that report available.
• 1:10:16
  Seth Holehouse: Perfect. And how can they they get access to that report that you're writing?
• 1:10:20
  James Patrick: Yeah. It's it's like an annual fee, and then there's monthly reports I write on that, breaking all this stuff down and what like, referencing the code and these decisions and just really breaking down and explaining it and economically analyzing what that means. And so
• 1:10:33
  Seth Holehouse: And is that report at thegreatgreat the great taking report Com has information about that report as well. Right?
• 1:10:40
  James Patrick: Yeah. Yeah. Perfect. So Perfect. Okay.
• 1:10:43
  Seth Holehouse: Alright. Thank you, James.
• 1:10:45
  James Patrick: Thank you.
• 1:10:46
  Seth Holehouse: So, hopefully, that wasn't too frightening for you. But, again, as I mentioned in the introduction, it's my job, I really believe, to bring you the stories that I think matter, and this is certainly one of those stories. Now just a quick caveat, you know, during the show, he talked about I asked him about, you know, the role of gold and silver, And how he explained it, this is exactly why I'm a big fan of gold and silver. It's not because I'm speculating. It's not because I'm thinking, oh, gosh.
• 1:11:10
  If gold goes up to 5,000 or this, I mean, of course, great. Right? You know, gold's at an all time high right now. It's over, you know, $3,000 an ounce. Silver's not doing too shabby either.
• 1:11:19
  But for me, it's not about trying to make money. It's about preserving my wealth. Because if you've come to the conclusion, which I have, that we're going through this great reset process, and whether you think Trump can stop it or whether you think he's part of it or whether you think he can't stop it, there's a lot of events that are happening that are bigger than what a single president can do. And I really do think that we are entering into this time period where that gigantic derivatives bubble, this entire system is changing. And so for me, the role of of precious metals, and not just gold and silver, but also land, food, brass, etcetera, that these are assets that I'm trying to preserve I'm used to preserve.
• 1:11:57
  Like, to me, this is an insurance policy. It's a lifeboat saying that, okay, if there is some sort of massive financial disruption, collapse, whatever it is, that this is a vehicle, a gold and silver, a vehicle to allow me to preserve some aspect of my wealth and get through to the other side. Now, of course, typically, when there's these kinds of crashes, gold and silver shortly after that end up going to record highs, because everyone realizes, hey. The whole system is fake. I want the real thing.
• 1:12:25
  And so there is that aspect of it, and and I've talked about that extensively on other interviews. However, it is again, I'm not I'm not a financial adviser. Do your own research. Right? This is not a financial advising show.
• 1:12:37
  However, it is my personal recommendation what I tell my friends and family to have at least some of your wealth stored in precious metals. Don't don't don't don't go empty out every account and put it in there. Don't be starving. You can't afford to put food on the table because you've got all your money type in gold and silver. But at least having some of your wealth in gold and silver, in my opinion, is extremely important.
• 1:12:58
  Now as, my guest mentioned, there are a lot of fraudulent companies companies. I used to work in the industry a while back. I know there's a lot of very fraudulent companies that you think you're buying, you know, however many ounces of gold or silver you're buying, you realize you were charged double or triple. I've seen this information coming out before. It's very true.
• 1:13:15
  So I have vetted. Any company that I work with, I recommend. I vet heavily. That's why I've chosen to work with Noble Gold. So if you want someone that you can trust, they'll say they specialize in IRAs and four zero one k transfers.
• 1:13:28
  If you wanna take out, you know, some portion of your IRA, move it into physical. There's ways of doing it and while avoiding the fees. Just go to goldwithseth.com or call (626) 654-1906. Again, that's goldwithseth.com or call (626) 654-1906. Alright.
• 1:13:48
  Thank you so much. Take care. God bless. Have a wonderful rest of your day. Numbers don't lie.
• 1:13:53
  The impact that Balance of Nature makes every single day is astounding. You can see the numbers for yourself at their website, balanceofnature.com. So listen to these stats concerning Balance of Nature's worldwide success. More than a thousand success stories are reported each month. Hundreds of thousands of customers worldwide.
• 1:14:12
  Millions of orders delivered each year and billions, yes, billions of fruits and veggie supplements consumed by people who've decided to start living better. There's only one number missing. That's you. Do what I did and add yourself to these numbers. Start taking Balance of Nature's whole food supplements like so many others around the world.
• 1:14:33
  Here's another number that should get your attention, 35%. Use my discount code Seth to get 35% off plus free shipping and their money back guarantee. You must use my discount code Seth. So call them at 802468751 and use the discount code Seth, or order online at balanceofnature.com. Use discount code Seth to get 35% off plus free shipping.