Congress’ Radical Plan To End Illegal Money

Authored by MN Gordon via,

One of the many downfalls of being the United States Secretary of the Treasury is the requirement to place one’s autograph on the face of the Federal Reserve’s legal tender notes.  There, on public display, is an overt record of a critical defect.  A signature endorsement of a Federal Reserve note by the Treasury Secretary represents their personal ratification of unconstitutional money.

If you recall, Article I, Section 8, of the U.S. Constitution empowers Congress – not the Federal Reserve – to coin money and regulate its value.  What’s more, Article I, Section 10, specifies that money be coined of gold and silver and cannot be bills of credit – such as paper legal tender notes.

As far as we can tell, paper dollars are illegal money on two counts.  First, they’re issued by the Federal Reserve.  Second, they’re bills of credit with no ties to gold or silver.

What gives?  Isn’t the U.S. Constitution supposed to be the supreme law of the land?

Don’t be silly.  Anyone with half their wits about them knows the U.S. Constitution has been reduced to a mere artifact of history.  Does this bother you?

It bothers us.  To be clear, we don’t take the recline and flail of the U.S. Constitution lightly.  But we also can’t ignore the pervasive truth of its sad state.

Of course, the dollar has other problems besides the major technicality of being illegal.  For example, its payment qualities are suspect.

Illegal Restrictions on Illegal Money

Several years ago JP Morgan Chase stopped accepting cash as payment for credit cards and mortgages.  Now Visa is dangling carrots in front of merchants with hungry stomachs.  Visa will upgrade a merchant’s payment system and in return the merchant will no longer accept cash payments from customers.

Aren’t these actions by JP Morgan Chase and the merchants that take up Visa on their offer also illegal?  The last we checked, cash, as in paper dollars, say: This note is legal tender for all debts, public and private.

We don’t see anything that disclaims certain parties from accepting cash payments.  Thus, illegal restrictions are being placed on illegal money.  At least, that’s how we see it.  But what do we know?  We still cut our own grass and pay our utility bills with hand written checks.

The point is, illegal money results in a whole host of problems.  Moreover, the man who now autographs the illegal money, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, has these problems – and many more – bearing down upon him.

In short, today’s money is created from debt; it’s borrowed into existence.  Over time, the economy has adjusted to this debt based money.  Business transactions are made with it.  Private and public buying and selling is conducted with it.  All commerce is now settled with debt payments.  Even debt is paid with debt.

The economy has also adjusted to an ever-increasing money supply that’s contingent upon ever-increasing levels of debt.  Just a brief pause in the expansion of the money supply and the whole thing falls apart.  Debts quickly fall into arrears and businesses and individuals go bankrupt, as they run out of new debt to pay their old debts.

Congress’ Radical Plan to End Illegal Money

Along the way, debt based money has also given way to ever expanding government debt.  Likewise, large components of the welfare-warfare state have become dependent upon it.  Small reductions in deficit spending lead to large consequences for the economy.

No doubt, Treasury Secretary Mnunchin has an intolerable job.  He must keep the economy humming by paying out the government’s illegal money.  However, to do so, he must also continue to run up the national debt.

But the national debt is closing in on its current debt ceiling.  Mnuchin will run out of the new debt he needs to pay the government’s obligations sometime in September if Congress doesn’t raise the debt ceiling.

So what’s the big deal?  Congress has raised the debt ceiling 78 times over the last 57 years.  Can’t they just raise it again?

Yes, and until recently raising the debt ceiling was practically a consent item.  However, because the national debt has increased from under $6 trillion at the turn of the new millennium to nearly $20 trillion today, the debt ceiling has become highly politicized in Congress.  Agreements to increase the debt ceiling must be met with other budget changes, including faux spending cuts, so that representatives can look good to their constituents.

Obviously, no one really believes that the Treasury will default on its debt.  After much jabbering and kvetching a deal will be reached at the 11th hour, right?  That’s what has happened in the recent past.

Yet given the quagmire Congress has made of its Obamacare repeal and replace efforts, you never know.  They just can’t seem to get anything done.  Perhaps they may unwittingly do us all a favor and fail to raise the debt ceiling.

Could the dopes in Congress hatch a more radical plan to put an end to the government’s illegal money?

Only by accident.


NidStyles Save_America1st Fri, 07/21/2017 - 11:30 Permalink

The Treasury could make the Trillion+ coins out of whatever it wanted and the Fed would have to take it. The Treasury determines legal tender, not the Fed.So it could make them out of ice and tell the Fed that it's worth whatever it wants, and the Fed would have to take it. That's why this system is such a farce. The Fed has zero power, but the Congress constantly in their infinite stupidity and traitorous ways continually cedes authority to it. The only power the Fed has, is that which it leverages through conspiracy and the Deep State. Neither of which could hope to stand up to the hundred plus million firearm owners in the US that hate them with a passion. If any President wanted to change this system, he could merely offer leniency on past crimes to turn on the Fed and the Deep State and be done with it.

In reply to by Save_America1st

pods derryb Fri, 07/21/2017 - 12:41 Permalink

JFK did no such thing (taking on the FED).HE had the power to issue silver certificates by silver, and he delegated that to his Treasury secretary C. Douglas Dillon, a banker.EO 11110 makes for a great storyline, but in reality it wasn't what people thought it was.I continually get whacked for saying this, so I will just add one link and let the downvotes commence.G. Edward Griffin destroys this myth:…

In reply to by derryb

Yog Soggoth pods Fri, 07/21/2017 - 13:04 Permalink

Sounds reasonable enough, but he must have had a leaker to raise the ire of LBJ and the rest of the group. I'm guessing he had plans, and there is a good possibility that they could have invoved currency. We will probably never know.The only one who survived was Ted because he was a compromised drunkard.

In reply to by pods

Treason Season Yog Soggoth Fri, 07/21/2017 - 13:20 Permalink

Yog, try to imagine you having one brother whose plane was shot down under orders from FDR and you had another brother got his brains blown out under orders from some fucking rabbi in Tel Aviv and you had another brother wacked in a kitchen resturaunt by a MKultra asassin and you had a nephew whose plane just fell out of the sky for no good reason at all. Do you think you might just be driven to drink? Just imagine.

In reply to by Yog Soggoth

Justin Case J S Bach Fri, 07/21/2017 - 14:25 Permalink

February 21, 1871 and the Forty-First Congress is in session. I refer you to the "Acts of the Forty-First Congress," Section 34, Session III, chapters 61 and 62. On this date in the history of our nation, Congress passed an Act titled: "An Act To Provide A Government for the District of Columbia." This is also known as the "Act of 1871." What does this mean? Well, it means that Congress, under no constitutional authority to do so, created a separate form of government for the District of Columbia, which is a ten mile square parcel of land. In essence, this Act formed the corporation known as THE UNITED STATES. Note the capitalization, because it is important. This corporation, owned by foreign interests, moved right in and shoved the original "organic" version of the Constitution into a dusty corner. With the "Act of 1871," our Constitution was defaced in the sense that the title was block-capitalized and the word "for" was changed to the word "of" in the title. The original Constitution drafted by the Founding Fathers, was written in this manner:"The Constitution for the united states of America".The altered version reads: "THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA". It is the corporate constitution. It is NOT the same document you might think it is. The corporate constitution operates in an economic capacity and has been used to fool the People into thinking it is the same parchment that governs the Republic. It absolutely is not.Capitalization — an insignificant change? Not when one is referring to the context of a legal document, it isn't. Such minor alterations have had major impacts on each subsequent generation born in this country. What the Congress did with the passage of the Act of 1871 was create an entirely new document, a constitution for the government of the District of Columbia. The kind of government THEY created was a corporation. The new, altered Constitution serves as the constitution of the corporation, and not that of America. Think about that for a moment.

In reply to by J S Bach

Shift For Brains Justin Case Fri, 07/21/2017 - 17:47 Permalink

The extent of the treachery is totally incomprehensible for those who have not studied it. These are facts hidden in plain sight, such as the article raised about how we wound up with private corporation obligation notes instead of the gold and silver coinage the Constitution clearly provided for.Look up the 1973 document from Sen. Frank Church's committee on the state of emergency that has existed since 1933; very few are still alive who have not lived their entire life under a US government declared state of emergency that has never been rescinded. The final report used to be available through the Government Printing Office; it is not an Internet hoax. Sen. Church's committee agreed that we have been under a fundamentally military emergency since 1933. Although every president COULD have rescinded it, none did. If that doesn't tell you there is no difference between the two political parties, nothing will.If you want to know where FDR got his authority to outlaw the private ownership of gold, you will find they used WWI's Trading with the Enemy Act nearly word for word; they just changed the object of the ban to gold and instead of the German government, it became US citizens who were the enemy.The government of THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA is a black hole of unimaginable deceit, greed and madness. It has not been a government FOR the People for many, many years.If it fell off the face of the earth and took all the sons of bitches who run it when it went, the world might have an opportunity for change. I would not lift a finger to save it.

In reply to by Justin Case

BullyBearish 38BWD22 Fri, 07/21/2017 - 11:16 Permalink

actually "money" is what PEOPLE say it is...what they are willing to trade their mental and physical labor for, which in essence is the only TRUE money because without that voluntary surrender of mental and physical labor the powers that be would cease to exist... As long as they control the "money", they control EVERYTHING...

In reply to by 38BWD22

SeaMonkeys BullyBearish Fri, 07/21/2017 - 12:55 Permalink

You're right. Money should represent what your labor creates. The money supply today is 95% made up of commercial loans created ex-nihilo. The Fed is just the hall monitor for the commercial banks. Most of our economy is a result of commerical bank lending.First, banks make loans for their own profit, not for the benefit of the community or country. This is the difference between the U.S. today and the Asian Tigers like Japan, Korea, Taiwan, China. Their banks lend (or used to lend in the case of Japan), for productive activities.Second, our money is created as loans with interest. This is "negative money." When the loans are paid back, the money supply contracts.Third, how is it that the medium of exchange can only exist as debt with interest? Without debt, 95% of the money would dissapear. How can this be our medium of exchange?Fourth, the interest is not contained in today's money supply. It must come from tomorrow's lending. This is why credit/debt is so important in America. This is why ZH has run articles on the slowing down of the "credit impulse." No new credit, no ability to pay interest-defaults, collapse, etc.Fifth, the writer is right to talk about sovereign money. Ben Franklin was proud of the colonies' ability to prosper with high productivity and low unemployment. He told the English this in the middle of the 1760's when they were in the middle of hard economic times. Quickly the Bank of England found out and forced the crown and Parliament to put a stop to the colonies' use of soveriegn money.The colonies went into immediate immiseration. This is the principle reason for the American Revolution.We need sovereign money, issued as equity, not as a debt or as an asset on a bank balance sheet. Limiting the money supply to gold or silver gives no advantage once the money is sovereign. Specie is a distraction. The economy is not a thing. It is the sum of activities that we Americans do and the ability to purchase what we want and need from our work. Assets are for speculators. We need a real economy, not an economy for speculators.

In reply to by BullyBearish

Justin Case SeaMonkeys Fri, 07/21/2017 - 14:35 Permalink

According to Keynesian economics, spending boosts the economy while savings contracts it.Keynesians put the cart before the horse. Savings and investment drive the economic productivity that enable consumers to enjoy a high standard of living. But Keynesians believe the economy only booms when demand is artificially pumped up by debt, government spending programs, and perpetual currency depreciation (inflation) engineered by central bankers.A gold standard produces deflation, its opponents charge, which incentivizes consumers to save money rather than spend it. Of course, what they call “deflation” is really just price stability. Over time, gold (and gold-backed money) maintains its purchasing power – neither gaining nor losing real value against other raw materials. When the U.S. pursued sound money policies from the post Civil War period into the early 1900s, consumer price levels were virtually flat; yet real economic growth soared. The Great Depression was caused not by gold but by a series of policy blunders from the recently established Federal Reserve.The claim that people pull back on consumption when their currency retains value is a red herring. The real distinction between sound gold money and inflationary fiat money is that under a sound dollar, individuals (and governments) are less apt to take on large debt loads. The reason why debt is so alluring under an inflationary monetary system is that the real value of an existing debt gets eaten away over time.

In reply to by SeaMonkeys

DieselChadron BullyBearish Fri, 07/21/2017 - 14:59 Permalink

to be certain, the money was hijacked.  once, it said "redeemable in gold coin".  then it said both, "redeemable in gold coin" and "legal tender for all debts".  finally, it said only "legal tender for all debts.  for one person to refuse trading his labor for any certain commodity would be easy.  for an entire nation to refuse trading their labor for a certain commodity would be very difficult - especially if the media was not doing a good job. 

In reply to by BullyBearish

Too-Big-to-Bail (not verified) Fri, 07/21/2017 - 11:05 Permalink

They're finally closing down the FED to stop counterfeit money? yippee!!!!

wmbz Fri, 07/21/2017 - 11:01 Permalink

"U.S. Constitution" the vast majority in the cesspool have zero regard for it. Most hate it, and many can not even spell it.Given the choice they would burn it.

Mr. Universe aardvarkk Fri, 07/21/2017 - 12:34 Permalink

Because they don't want free thinking educated people who can communicate with each other without a "device".My 8 year old has spent several hours this summer learning cursive. Her choice. I provide all the books, paper, pencils and help when she needs it. I don't provide, cell phones, iPads, laptops, nintendos, etc.

In reply to by aardvarkk