US To Roll Back Some China Tariffs If Beijing Cracks Down On Export Of Fentanyl Precursor Chemicals

The US is prepared to roll back some tariffs on China if Beijing cracks down on the export of chemicals that produce fentanyl, under a trade framework that President Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping are set to discuss Thursday, the WSJ reported citing people familiar. 

According to the report, China is expected to commit to more controls on the export of precursor chemicals used to make fentanyl. In return, the U.S. could cut its 20% fentanyl-related tariff on Chinese goods by as much as 10%, the people said.

If Trump lowers the fentanyl-tariff on Chinese goods to 10%, it would bring the average tariff on most Chinese imports, currently around 55%, to about 45%. That would put China’s average tariff rate closer to those of other trading partners, potentially reducing the price competitiveness of goods manufactured outside of China. Indicatively, goods from India and Brazil face 50% tariffs, and the Trump administration has said Chinese goods transshipped through Southeast Asian nations would face 40% tariffs, much higher than the 19%-20% rate for other goods from the region.

Bringing the total tariffs on China closer to the 40% levies threatened on Southeast Asian nations would reduce the incentive for Chinese firms to transship goods through those economies to the U.S., while potentially motivating more direct trade between China and the U.S.

The administration reached two trade agreements and two frameworks with Southeast Asian nations this week that included provisions to prevent China from exporting goods through their economies at below-market prices.

The U.S. and China are also expected to reduce port fees on each other’s ships, the report goes on.

Separately, China is also expected to commit to significant purchases of American soybeans, Bessent said in a CBS News interview on Sunday, potentially bringing relief to U.Sp. farmers hit hard by the loss of Chinese buyers this year.

If Beijing agrees, the framework would ease market-rattling tensions between the world’s two biggest economies. Earlier this month, China tightened controls on rare earths, a sector it dominates, potentially jolting global supply chains that rely on them to manufacture everything from electric vehicles to jet fighters. In turn Trump threatened another 100% tariffs on China. Now, under the new framework, the U.S. expects China to delay the new rare-earths rules.

“I believe that they are going to delay that for a year while they re-examine it,” Bessent said in an interview with ABC News on Sunday.

The expected deferral of China’s latest rare-earth controls means Trump’s threat to impose a 100% tariff on all Chinese goods by Nov. 1 is now “effectively off the table,” Bessent told CBS News.

There's more: Chinese negotiators are also expecting the U.S. to freeze potential new policy actions deemed as harmful to China, such as controls on exports of products made with U.S. software. Bessent told CBS News on Sunday there have been no changes to U.S. export controls.

It is unclear how the framework would affect a different set of rare-earths restrictions that Beijing announced in April. The established licensing system suggests authorities could ramp up rare-earth restrictions again if the U.S. were to impose new trade policies deemed harmful to China.

Chinese Vice Commerce Minister Li Chenggang, a senior member of China’s trade delegation, said the two sides have reached “preliminary consensus” on issues including export controls, reciprocal tariffs, fentanyl-related tariffs, cooperation on fentanyl, an expansion of bilateral trade and port fees. Both sides will then go through domestic approval processes, he said.

“The current turbulences and twists and turns are the ones that we do not wish to see,” Li said.

Federal Bureau of Investigation Director Kash Patel is set to travel to Beijing to discuss the fentanyl issue with Chinese authorities, said people familiar with the matter.

The expected agreements are subject to change and dependent on the meeting of the two leaders. Details are expected to be hammered out in subsequent negotiations.

Tyler Durden Tue, 10/28/2025 - 12:50

Two-Screen Analysis

By Michael Every of Rabobank

A depressing development in Hollywood, besides CGI and AI, is the rise of ‘two-screen viewing’, where scripts are simplified so audiences glued to their phones can follow the ‘plot’ in the background rather than being distracted by it: TV/movies are ‘product’ for those who don’t pay attention. One could argue the same with financial market media and ‘two-screen analysis’.

None are covering Islamist Sudanese paramilitaries advancing into the military’s last stronghold in Darfur: there are no assets there. But none are covering Russia’s test of a powerful new missile either, or Norway’s defence minister warning Moscow is concentrating its nuclear forces in the Arctic Circle in preparation “for war with NATO”, or Trump telling Putin the US has “the world’s greatest nuclear submarine stationed right off their shores." They only notice the deals related to the above, such as Lukoil planning to sell its international assets following US sanctions. That’s being behind the curve, to use the language financial media purport to understand.

There are plenty of such deals - and sparse analysis of them. The UK just agreed an $11bn Eurofighter sale to Turkey when the Ministry of Defense is reportedly underfunded and planning cuts even as it’s told to rearm rapidly. Politico claims to have ‘Germany’s new €377bn military wish list’ to become the most powerful conventional military in Europe: it’s of course anchored in German industry, with the exception of a few key US systems, such as upgraded F-15s and 400 Tomahawk missiles. There are implications there for Europe in multiple dimensions.

The US losing a helicopter and fighter jet within 30 minutes in the South China Sea yesterday may have been down to “bad fuel”, according to Trump. If so, it’s an indictment of US Navy logistics. That’s why we are seeing US strategic deals with South Korea and Japan to build US ships in their shipyards; the US says Japan's pledged $550bn FDI package will focus on infrastructure such as electricity and energy; and Trump and PM Takaichi will today talk trade and defence, which are increasingly the same thing.

On which note, Europe has also seen far-from-normal developments:

Former ECB President Draghi called for “pragmatic federalism” where clusters of EU countries agree to policies rather than one-size fits all. EC President Von der Leyen laid out green tech policies that imply massive use of economic statecraft: huge non-tariff barriers (“Made in Europe” for all state tenders); capital controls (screen FDI so it’s “in the EU’s interests”: and outbound FDI?); and tariffs and subsidies (support for key sectors - “You are critical to Europe's future. and your future will be made in Europe. That is critical for us”). 

Both Macron and VdL threatened China with the EU’s Anti-Coercion Instrument over withholding rare earths, which would shatter EU-China trade and make the Nexperia crisis look like nothing, even as its China parent Wingtech declares a cash-flow risk and an EU car production shutdowns loom as chip supplies dry up, Covid-style.

The EU is to launch a "RESourceEU" plan before end-2025, on top of the EU Critical Minerals Act that has so far achieved little, to: diversify supply chains (to countries who already did deals with the US and China); boost domestic extraction and refining in the EU (which is highly polluting and uneconomic); scaling up recycling; and strengthening strategic reserves to guard against supply disruptions (so central planning and commodity buying as well as the need to set agreed market price ceilings and floors?).

Moreover, Politico also reports the ‘EU will move to take on Wall Street with major financial reform proposals’. These include amending the EU’s flagship financial market rules, MiFID and MiFIR; for clearinghouses (EMIR); investments (AIFMD/the UCITS Directive); central securities depositories (CSDR); crypto rules (MiCA); and the regulation of markets watchdog (ESMA). Moreover, the Commission is also planning to propose financial markets supervision moving from the national to EU level. As said here many times, geopolitics now drives market paradigm shifts.

In Latin America, Argentina’s markets rallied strongly over Milei’s political victory. Moreover, Brazil’s Lula stated he sees a “definitive solution’ with the US coming within days, and that Trump “guaranteed” him a trade deal: is it a coincidence that Lula also offered to help the US mediate with Venezuela? On that front, Venezuela is moving to cancel energy agreements with Trinidad after a US warship arrived at the neighbouring island nation, which analysts see hurts Venezuela more than Trinidad.

In North America, Canada’s PM Carney is now floating dropping the 100% tariff on Chinese EVs it had agreed in line with the US in return for lower tariffs on Canadian pork and canola into China. Now that there is no transshipment possible into the US due to its tariffs on Canada --could they now go higher in response?-- that just implies more pressure on the Canadian auto industry already struggling with the loss of sales to the US and potential production shifts south of the border. One wonders if any analysis of the value-add of the agri vs auto industries is being done – is there an economic statecraft target in either direction, or is it just potentially-expensive ‘we have options, you know’ messaging to Trump?

In Asia, after Trump’s swirl of charm-offensive critical minerals deals and a Thailand-Cambodia peace treaty, China and ASEAN inked an upgraded free trade pact covering digital, green economies, and supply chain connectivity.

In the domestic political economy sphere, but with global implications, Australia’s largest aluminium smelter is in employee talks for potential closure: is the Aussie role in the new geopolitical geoeconomic order also just the old one – resources?

UK Chancellor Reeves reportedly faces another £20bn hit to UK public finances due to a downgrading of assumed UK productivity by the budget watchdog by 0.3 percentage points per annum.

The French parliament just voted to increase corporation tax from 33.8% to 35% next year, as the Socialist Party will reportedly wait until the end of the week to decide whether to topple the government over a wealth tax, which they want to see start at 3% of assets over €10m, not 2% on over €100m, as the government proposes.

Spain’s already-wobbly government lost a coalition partner, making the passage of any legislation more difficult; and

In the US, the Wall Street Journal says, ‘Amazon to Lay Off Up to 30,000 Corporate Workers’, and below it, ‘The Good Vibes Are Back on Wall Street’. In-between is a smaller headline stating that big firms think they can keep growing without hiring anyone.

Meanwhile, The Economist proclaims, ‘The end of the rip-off economy’ as “From finance and medicine to used cars, artificial intelligence is radically improving market efficiency.” Is that also twin-screen analysis, where a ‘Hollywood ending’ plot is shot-gunned into the eyes of those who might otherwise see a vastly more complex, nuanced, and perhaps even diametrically opposed picture?

Tyler Durden Tue, 10/28/2025 - 12:45

Nvidia's $1 Billion Bet Aims To Transform Nokia Into The West's Answer To Huawei

The endless stream of AI headlines continues...

Just ahead of the lunch hour in New York, Bloomberg reported that Nvidia will invest $1 billion in Nokia, acquiring a 2.9% stake by purchasing 166 million shares at $6.01 each. The headline was enough to catapult Nokia's shares in Europe up 17%. U.S.-listed shares were briefly halted, now up 21%.

Under the new partnership, Nvidia's AI chips will power Nokia's AI-accelerated 5G and 6G software and will explore integrating Nokia's data center technologies into Nvidia's own infrastructure. The deal transforms Nokia into the only Western full-stack alternative to Huawei in the telecommunications grid.

CEO Justin Hotard has led Nokia's impressive turnaround. He recently acquired Infinera for $2.3 billion to expand into AI networking hardware. For Nvidia, this partnership adds to the ever-expanding list of AI investments, which includes OpenAI, Wayve, Oxa, Revolut, PolyAI, and a billion-euro data center project with Deutsche Telekom.

U.S.-listed Nokia shares jumped as much as 21%.

The 21% move higher is the largest intraday gain in U.S.-listed Nokia shares since January 2021.

What happened to Nokia? Thought it was dead. Everyone who was around in the 1990s and early 2000s who had a Nokia handset remembers this...

Now, Nokia is being positioned to become the "Huawei of the West." What a dramatic turnaround.

Tyler Durden Tue, 10/28/2025 - 12:10

The 3 Stages Of Gold Miners

Authored by Adam Sharp via DailyReckoning.com,

As we wait patiently for this correction in gold, silver, and miners to end, now is an excellent time to review the fundamentals of precious metal miners.

This is especially important for those of you looking to start or add to positions during this pullback.

Today we’re going to explore the three types of mining stocks:

• Producers

• Developers

• Explorers.

We’ll explain the risk/reward of each stage, which is critical to finding success in this sector.

Producers: The Safest Bet

Producers are miners already producing metal. Barrick Mining (B) is a classic example of a large (senior) gold producer.

In 2024, Barrick produced 3.91 million ounces of gold, worth over $15 billion at $4,000/oz. The company also produced 195,000 tonnes of copper, and plenty of silver, lead, and other metals.

Producers are the safest bet in mining, yet still offer plenty of upside. They tend to outperform in the early stages of precious metal bull markets.

Because they’re already producing metal, rising gold and silver prices immediately boost their revenue and profitability.

Well-run producers have significant leverage to underlying precious metal prices.

For example, let’s say that 2 years ago, the average producer was pulling gold from the ground at a cost of $1,300 per ounce and selling it at $1,900.

That’s a profit of $600/oz, not bad. But today many producers are pulling gold out of the dirt for $1,500/oz, and selling it at $4,000.

That’s a profit of $2,500 per ounce. About 4x higher than it was just 2 years ago. This is why it’s not surprising that big gold miners have nearly doubled over the last year. And why they could have much further to run.

Institutional investors tend to stick to producers, because only these companies have the liquidity and size that allow substantial buying.

Producers are great. The vast majority of my portfolio is in this stage.

But some people like a higher risk/reward, and that’s where developers (and explorers) come into play.

Developers: Harder Difficulty

Gold/silver developers are companies that have already gotten through the exploration stage. They’ve drilled and surveyed their claims, and now it’s time to start getting all the necessary permits and building infrastructure.

Developers have little, if any revenue. Yet they do have substantial costs. So raising money is an important part of being a development-stage miner. You need an experienced team who knows how to navigate capital markets.

A great management team will minimize share dilution and raise capital strategically and smartly. Most others will dilute heavily and struggle to reward shareholders.

Investing in developers isn’t easy. You need to correctly analyze:

• Geology – is the deposit a worthy one?

• Capital markets – is the company efficiently raising money?

• Management – does leadership know how to hire the right team and run a mine?

Investing in developers is far more challenging than producers. But it can be extremely rewarding. Successfully investing in developers also takes patience. It takes many years to successfully develop a precious metals mine.

Development-stage miners sometimes outperform producers in the second stage of a bull market (we have only begun to see hints of this).

But unless you’re a geologist with deep investing experience, it’s best to leave this category to the experts like Jim Rickards, Byron King, and Dan Amoss.

And still, I prefer to keep the vast majority of my miner exposure in producers.

Explorers: Advanced Investors Only

Ahh, now we finally come to the explorers. This includes the “penny dreadfuls”, as Rick Rule calls them. The tiny juniors with nothing but a patch of dirt, a dream, and an investor pitch deck.

In previous bull markets, explorers have outperformed in the later stages of the cycle. Once general investors flood into the market, they often seek out high leverage opportunities. And when money floods into this miniscule corner of the market, things can get crazy.

It’s important to note, however, that the vast majority of explorer-stage miners will fail. Their deposit won’t pan out, or they’ll fail to raise the necessary capital. Or they won’t get the necessary permits. Or one of a dozen other bad outcomes will happen.

However, maybe 1% of explorers will eventually become huge winners (100x+ returns are possible over many years). These are the few that will make it to the large-scale production stage, or become acquired somewhere along the way.

But picking winning explorers isn’t easy, even for professionals. This stage is for advanced investors only. If you’re buying explorers based on some random article or post you find online, chances are high you’re being marketed to.

The mining space is full of stock promotions, so whenever you hear a pitch for a tiny junior explorer, your spidey-senses should be tingling.

Don’t get me wrong, in a bull market you can make money even on mediocre explorers. But just keep in mind that there’s a good chance the company won’t make it to the development or producer stages.

Only invest in explorers when recommended by someone you trust. And even then, there’s a decent chance it won’t work out.

If you want to also speculate on some explorers and developers, do so thoughtfully. Follow the lead of experts like the ones we have here at Paradigm. Jim Rickards, Dan Amoss, and Byron King are all world-class mining analysts. And even then, they’ll mostly steer you towards the big producers, because they offer a superior risk/reward equation.

For a diversified approach to smaller stocks in this sector, I like the Sprott Junior Gold Miner ETF (SGDJ). There’s also the GDXJ “junior” miner ETF, but that’s really not a junior fund. It’s become too large, and so they’ve been forced to invest in stocks that aren’t exactly junior.

For most investors, sticking to senior producers is by far the safest bet. And as I mentioned, there’s still plenty of upside in these stocks.

One final note. There is overlap within these stages. For example, producers are also exploring and developing. But explorers are not producing. And that’s a key difference.

Tyler Durden Tue, 10/28/2025 - 12:05

Peter Schiff: Printing Money Is Not the Cure for Cononavirus



In his most recent podcast, Peter Schiff talked about coronavirus and the impact that it is having on the markets. Earlier this month, Peter said he thought the virus was just an excuse for stock market woes. At the time he believed the market was poised to fall anyway. But as it turns out, coronavirus has actually helped the US stock market because it has led central banks to pump even more liquidity into the world financial system. All this means more liquidity — central banks easing. In fact, that is exactly what has already happened, except the new easing is taking place, for now, outside the United States, particularly in China.” Although the new money is primarily being created in China, it is flowing into dollars — the dollar index is up — and into US stocks. Last week, US stock markets once again made all-time record highs. In fact, I think but for the coronavirus, the US stock market would still be selling off. But because of the central bank stimulus that has been the result of fears over the coronavirus, that actually benefitted not only the US dollar, but the US stock market.” In the midst of all this, Peter raises a really good question. The primary economic concern is that coronavirus will slow down output and ultimately stunt economic growth. Practically speaking, the world would produce less stuff. If the virus continues to spread, there would be fewer goods and services produced in a market that is hunkered down. Why would the Federal Reserve respond, or why would any central bank respond to that by printing money? How does printing more money solve that problem? It doesn’t. In fact, it actually exacerbates it. But you know, everybody looks at central bankers as if they’ve got the solution to every problem. They don’t. They don’t have the magic wand. They just have a printing press. And all that creates is inflation.” Sometimes the illusion inflation creates can look like a magic wand. Printing money can paper over problems. But none of this is going to fundamentally fix the economy. In fact, if central bankers were really going to do the right thing, the appropriate response would be to drain liquidity from the markets, not supply even more.” Peter explained how the Fed was originally intended to create an “elastic” money supply that would expand or contract along with economic output. Today, the money supply only goes in one direction — that’s up. The economy is strong, print money. The economy is weak, print even more money.” Of course, the asset that’s doing the best right now is gold. The yellow metal pushed above $1,600 yesterday. Gold is up 5.5% on the year in dollar terms and has set record highs in other currencies. Because gold is rising even in an environment where the dollar is strengthening against other fiat currencies, that shows you that there is an underlying weakness in the dollar that is right now not being reflected in the Forex markets, but is being reflected in the gold markets. Because after all, why are people buying gold more aggressively than they’re buying dollars or more aggressively than they’re buying US Treasuries? Because they know that things are not as good for the dollar or the US economy as everybody likes to believe. So, more people are seeking out refuge in a better safe-haven and that is gold.” Peter also talked about the debate between Trump and Obama over who gets credit for the booming economy – which of course, is not booming.

We are living in crazy times. I have a hard time believing that most of the general public is not awake, but in reality, they are. We've never seen anything like this; I mean not even under Obama during the worst part of the Great Recession." Now the Fed is desperately trying to keep interest rates from rising. The problem is that it's a much bigger debt bubble this time around , and the Fed is going to have to blow a lot more air into it to keep it inflated. The difference is this time it's not going to work." It looks like the Fed did another $104.15 billion of Not Q.E. in a single day. The Fed claims it's only temporary. But that is precisely what Bernanke claimed when the Fed started QE1. Milton Freedman once said, "Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program." The same applies to Q.E., or whatever the Fed wants to pretend it's doing. Except this is not QE4, according to Powell. Right. Pumping so much money out, and they are accusing China of currency manipulation ? Wow! Seriously! Amazing! Dump the U.S. dollar while you still have a chance. Welcome to The Atlantis Report. And it is even worse than that, In addition to the $104.15 billion of "Not Q.E." this past Thursday; the FED added another $56.65 billion in liquidity to financial markets the next day on Friday. That's $160.8 billion in two days!!!! in just 48 hours. That is more than 2 TIMES the highest amount the FED has ever injected on a monthly basis under a Q.E. program (which was $80 billion per month) Since this isn't QE....it will be really scary on what they are going to call Q.E. Will it twice, three times, four times, five times what this injection per month ! It is going to be explosive since it takes about 60 to 90 days for prices to react to this, January should see significant inflation as prices soak up the excess liquidity. The question is, where will the inflation occur first . The spike in the repo rate might have a technical explanation: a misjudgment was made in the Fed's money market operations. Even so, two conclusions can be drawn: managing the money markets is becoming harder, and from now on, banks will be studying each other's creditworthiness to a greater degree than before. Those people, who struggle with the minutiae of money markets, and that includes most professionals, should focus on the causes and not the symptoms. Financial markets have recovered from each downturn since 1980 because interest rates have been cut to new lows. Post-2008, they were cut to near zero or below zero in all major economies. In response to a new financial crisis, they cannot go any lower. Central banks will look for new ways to replicate or broaden Q.E. (At some point, governments will simply see repression as an easier option). Then there is the problem of 'risk-free' assets becoming risky assets. Financial markets assume that the probability of major governments such as the U.S. or U.K. defaulting is zero. These governments are entering the next downturn with debt roughly twice the levels proportionate to GDP that was seen in 2008. The belief that the policy worked was completely predicated on the fact that it was temporary and that it was reversible, that the Fed was going to be able to normalize interest rates and shrink its balance sheet back down to pre-crisis levels. Well, when the balance sheet is five-trillion, six-trillion, seven-trillion when we're back at zero, when we're back in a recession, nobody is going to believe it is temporary. Nobody is going to believe that the Fed has this under control, that they can reverse this policy. And the dollar is going to crash. And when the dollar crashes, it's going to take the bond market with it, and we're going to have stagflation. We're going to have a deep recession with rising interest rates, and this whole thing is going to come imploding down. everything is temporary with the fed including remaining off the gold standard temporary in the Fed's eyes could mean at least 50 years This liquidity problem is a signal that trading desks are loaded up on inventory and can't get rid of it. Repo is done out of a need for cash. If you own all of your securities (i.e., a long-only, no leverage mutual fund) you have no need to "repo" your securities - you're earning interest every night so why would you want to 'repo' your securities where you are paying interest for that overnight loan (securities lending is another animal). So, it is those that 'lever-up' and need the cash for settlement purposes on securities they've bought with borrowed money that needs to utilize the repo desk. With this in mind, as we continue to see this need to obtain cash (again, needed to settle other securities purchases), it shows these firms don't have the capital to add more inventory to, what appears to be, a bloated inventory. Now comes the fun part: the Treasury is about to auction 3's, 10's, and 30-year bonds. If I am correct (again, I could be wrong), the Fed realizes securities firms don't have the shelf space to take down a good portion of these auctions. If there isn't enough retail/institutional demand, it will lead to not only a crappy sale but major concerns to the street that there is now no backstop, at all, to any sell-off. At which point, everyone will want to be the first one through the door and sell immediately, but to whom? If there isn't enough liquidity in the repo market to finance their positions, the firms would be unable to increase their inventory. We all saw repo shut down on the 2008 crisis. Wall St runs on money. . OVERNIGHT money. They lever up to inventory securities for trading. If they can't get overnight money, they can't purchase securities. And if they can't unload what they have, it means the buy-side isn't taking on more either. Accounts settle overnight. This includes things like payrolls and bill pay settlements. If a bank doesn't have enough cash to payout what its customers need to pay out, it borrows. At least one and probably more than one banks are insolvent. That's what's going on. First, it can't be one or two banks that are short. They'd simply call around until they found someone to lend. But they did that, and even at markedly elevated rates, still, NO ONE would lend them the money. That tells me that it's not a problem of a couple of borrowers, it's a problem of no lenders. And that means that there's no bank in the world left with any real liquidity. They are ALL maxed out. But as bad as that is, and that alone could be catastrophic, what it really signals is even worse. The lending rates are just the flip side of the coin of the value of the assets lent against. If the rates go up, the value goes down. And with rates spiking to 10%, how far does the value fall? Enormously! And if banks had to actually mark down the value of the assets to reflect 10% interest rates, then my god, every bank in the world is insolvent overnight. Everyone's capital ratios are in the toilet, and they'd have to liquidate. We're talking about the simultaneous insolvency of every bank on the planet. Bank runs. No money in ATMs, Branches closed. Safe deposit boxes confiscated. The whole nine yards, It's actually here. The scenario has tended to guide toward for years and years is actually happening RIGHT NOW! And people are still trying to say it's under control. Every bank in the world is currently insolvent. The only thing keeping it going is printing billions of dollars every day. Financial Armageddon isn't some far off future risk. It's here. Prepare accordingly. This fiat system has reached the end of the line, and it's not correct that fiat currencies fail by design. The problem is corruption and manipulation. It is corruption and cheating that erodes trust and faith until the entire system becomes a gigantic fraud. Banks and governments everywhere ARE the problem and simply have to be removed. They have lost all trust and respect, and all they have left is war and mayhem. As long as we continue to have a majority of braindead asleep imbeciles following orders from these psychopaths, nothing will change. Fiat currency is not just thievery. Fiat currency is SLAVERY. Ultimately the most harmful effect of using debt of undefined value as money (i.e., fiat currencies) is the de facto legalization of a caste system based on voluntary slavery. The bankers have a charter, or the legal *right*, to create money out of nothing. You, you don't. Therefore you and the bankers do not have the same standing before the law. The law of the land says that you will go to jail if you do the same thing (creating money out of thin air) that the banker does in full legality. You and the banker are not equal before the law. ALL the countries of the world; Islamic or secular, Jewish or Arab, democracy or dictatorship; all of them place the bankers ABOVE you. And all of you accept that only whining about fiat money going down in exchange value over time (price inflation which is not the same as monetary inflation). Actually, price inflation itself is mainly due to the greed and stupidity of the bankers who could keep fiat money's exchange value reasonably stable, only if they wanted to. Witness the crash of silver and gold prices which the bankers of the world; Russian, American, Chinese, Jewish, Indian, Arab, all of them collaborated to engineer through the suppression and stagnation of precious metals' prices to levels around the metals' production costs, or what it costs to dig gold and silver out of the ground. The bankers of the world could also collaborate to keep nominal prices steady (as they do in the case of the suppression of precious metals prices). After all, the ability to create fiat money and force its usage is a far more excellent source of power and wealth than that which is afforded simply by stealing it through inflation. The bankers' greed and stupidity blind them to this fact. They want it all, and they want it now. In conclusion, The bankers can create money out of nothing and buy your goods and services with this worthless fiat money, effectively for free. You, you can't. You, you have to lead miserable existences for the most of you and WORK in order to obtain that effectively nonexistent, worthless credit money (whose purchasing/exchange value is not even DEFINED thus rendering all contracts based on the null and void!) that the banker effortlessly creates out of thin air with a few strokes of the computer keyboard, and which he doesn't even bother to print on paper anymore, electing to keep it in its pure quantum uncertain form instead, as electrons whizzing about inside computer chips which will become mute and turn silent refusing to tell you how many fiat dollars or euros there are in which account, in the absence of electricity. No electricity, no fiat, nor crypto money. It would appear that trust is deteriorating as it did when Lehman blew up . Something really big happened that set off this chain reaction in the repo markets. Whatever that something is, we aren't be informed. They're trying to cover it up, paper it over with conjured cash injections, play it cool in front of the cameras while sweating profusely under the 5 thousands dollar suits. I'm guessing that the final high-speed plunge into global economic collapse has begun. All we see here is the ripples and whitewater churning the surface, but beneath the surface, there is an enormous beast thrashing desperately in its death throws. Now is probably the time to start tying up loose ends with the long-running prep projects, just saying. In other words, prepare accordingly, and Get your money out of the banks. I don't care if you don't believe me about Bitcoin. Get your money out of the banks. Don't keep any more money in a bank than you need to pay your bills and can afford to lose.











The Financial Armageddon Economic Collapse Blog tracks trends and forecasts , futurists , visionaries , free investigative journalists , researchers , Whistelblowers , truthers and many more













The Financial Armageddon Economic Collapse Blog tracks trends and forecasts , futurists , visionaries , free investigative journalists , researchers , Whistelblowers , truthers and many more

The FBI released a summary of its file from the Hillary Clinton email investigation on Friday, showing details of Clinton's explanation of her use of a private email server to handle classified communications. The release comes nearly two months after FBI Director James Comey announced that although Clinton's handling of classified information was "extremely careless," it did not rise to the level of a prosecutable offense. Attorney General Loretta Lynch announced the next day that she would not pursue charges in the matter. "We are making these materials available to the public in the interest of transparency and in response to numerous Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests," the FBI noted in a statement sent to reporters with links to the documents. The documents include notes from Clinton's July 2 interview with agents, as well as a "factual summary of the FBI's investigation into this matter," according to the FBI release. Throughout her interview with agents, Clinton repeatedly said she relied on the career professionals she worked with to handle classified information correctly. The agents asked about a series of specific emails, and in each case Clinton said she wasn't worried about the particular material being discussed on a nonclassified channel.