News & Analysis
The Ron Paul Hoax?
The Incontrovertible Conundrum Of Dr. Ron Paul ... Without apologies, this research and writing should in no way be misinterpreted as any form of support for the Federal Reserve System or the usury that supports its organized crime by myself, or that this is just some personal attack on Ron Paul ... In short, this [audit the Fed] bill represents the ultimate power of misinformation and the controlled opposition that is beholden of it. We are a defeated people in all respects of our lives – from education to incarceration – from corporate politics to corporate religion – from financial usury to medical malfeasance... all of which is made possible by the actions and inaction of Congress. – Reality Blog
Dominant Social Theme: Ron Paul is an Austrian fraud.
Free-Market Analysis: The Reality Blog is written by "Clint Richardson," another anti-usury alternative media writer. Thanks to feedbacker Danny B. for drawing our attention to it.
Despite Mr. Richardson's erudition and good writing skills, we recognize areas of predictability. He claims to be a Ron Paul supporter of sorts but pretty much damns Ron Paul as a fraud.
He believes the government has a lot of secret money thanks to Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) research, though hard money economist Gary North has debunked CAFR numbers.
Mr. Richardson is also running light-heartedly for US president. He has a forceful platform, though unfortunately, it is anti-interest.
In our research we discovered that many who advocate alternative currencies are involved one way or another with United Nations programs and especially with green solutions. A leading proponent of alternative currencies is Margrit Kennedy who used to work for UNESCO.
You can see our articles here:
At least Mr. Richardson does not make the argument that the Federal Reserve is an entirely private entity. He points out that it is a government agency in terms of its charter, which is just what we've been arguing all along in these pages.
It is an important argument for Greenbackers, social crediters and Georgists who are making a determined case that the US Federal Reserve in particular is PRIVATE. Of course, it is private in terms of functionality but not in terms of charter.
Those who seek to preserve pure fiat monopoly money and discredit the ordinary man's use of gold and silver argue that the problem with pure fiat is that the "banksters" are in control. Mr. Richardson does us the service once again of pointing out that most clearly the Fed is a quasi-public institution.
Proponents of monopoly fiat money want to maintain the fiction that "banksters" are in charge of the Fed. This may be so but the reason the Fed has so much power is because it derives its authority from the US government.
Here's what Mr. Richardson writes in "Today's Creatures From Jekyll Island":
I am simply telling you the facts: The Federal Reserve System is a government agency that is politically independent (not naturally or lawfully independent), no differently than the Post Office or the Social Security System or many other independent agencies of government, and that it is government that holds the wealth and stock ownership of most corporations and banks.
There are no ownership shareholders of the Federal Reserve because the Federal Reserve does not offer ownership stock. Wallmart and Monsanto offer "public" ownership stock, for which people and government has been purchasing for decades. But government corporations do not offer public (ownership) stock, which means that government is not owned.
Thus, the myth that "corporations own the government" can also be dismissed here. It is quite the opposite, actually. The word "own" is the legal holding of stock of a corporation. So while there is very much a symbiotic relationship between corporations (including banks) and government, the fact is that government owns shares in corporations, and not the other way around. The reality is that at any time government, with the swish of a pen or the dumping of its collective stock, can indeed shut down or make insignificant any corporation it chooses to. On the other hand, no corporation can do the same to government.
Mr. Richardson makes good points here. We only wish he didn't want to use the awesome force of government to prevent people from engaging in private transactions – in this case, charging interest on money. So many interesting minds have adopted this formulation. They want freedom from Money Power but only in areas where they disagree. It is like being "a little bit" pregnant.
Mr. Richardson has a lot of other interesting ideas. He apparently believes Fedgov is a corporation. G. Edward Griffin has offered a debunking article on this point entitled, "Is the United States government a corporation? If True, So What?"
Ron Paul is not a big hero of Mr. Richardson's. On his blog he spends a lot of time debunking Ron Paul and especially his audit the Fed legislation. We have doubts about that legislation, as well. You can see them here.
But we don't think Ron Paul is an out-and-out fraud. His life's history shows the same intellectual agenda for decades. If Paul was being set up as some sort of lynchpin in a power elite dialectic, it was a mighty patient process.
No, like the Austrian School itself, like the Internet, like numerous elements of society, Ron Paul's popularity was probably an accident. He was obviously shocked by it and so was the establishment. Money Power rushed to provide him handlers like Jesse Benton, apparently.
To put him at the center of some sort of vast power-elite conspiracy to re-establish a formal, state run gold standard is likely ridiculous. Right now, Paul's big campaign is to undo legal tender laws. He doesn't much believe in state power and has spent a career voting against it.
Mr. Richardson is a wonderful researcher but we don't much trust documentation these days. Nor media reports. We look for patterns that reveal dominant social themes. Then we try to evaluate the back-story to see if it confirms our perception.
We can apply this to almost any element of modern news. For instance, Israel is often damned as the controller of America. We know this is ridiculous because Israel is only 70 years old. The US has been under attack by Money Power for far longer than that.
Another possible canard is that China and Russia are becoming determined opponents of the US. First of all, there really ARE no countries, only people with varying agendas. Second, both "countries" use Western forms of economics and are partners in many elements of the West's globalist aspirations.
Money Power seeks to dominate both sides of a conflict. Thus, at the very top Money Power is possibly in partial or full control of both China and Russia. At least in many ways the powers-that-be work together.
As for Ron Paul, when we examine his historical personality, we have a great deal of difficulty believing he was part of some sort of Money Power "sleeper cell" going back 20 or 30 years. Doesn't make sense to us, though, of course, we always reserve the right to be wrong.
Conclusion: Finally, we have these questions: How does government know how much money to print? In other words, how much is too much?
Posted by ghendric on 09/05/12 11:30 AM
re:"Ron Paul's popularity was probably an accident."
I don't think it was an accident. The message of liberty and freedom is pretty strong followed with a voting record to prove his worthyness. He's exactly the type of person that should be in Congress. Thanks to the internet, we can see his unwaivering from telling the truth and predicting accurate financial outcomes because of the Federal Reserves monetary policies. Bottom line, he's telling us the truth and thats what we want. We have a much better understanding of the Fed and how they have destroyed the value of our money as a result.. We were still on a gold standard when I was a kid. Our money used to be able to buy a lot of things then. There was penny candy..
Posted by bionic mosquito on 09/05/12 12:03 PM
Wow! Feedback is finally back! And apparently open, as before.
Welcome back, DB
Reply from The Daily Bell
Welcome back, to you.
Posted by drdavisdr on 09/05/12 12:20 PM
Clint Richardson is a real piece of work. Must I say more. Ron Paul is honest, can you say that for the WH, or Congress? He is truthful and loves his country as I do. He is not perfect but are you or am I NO!. At least he is not out to destroy the Constitution and our Bill of Rights as our Obama is and his WH and stands for ISLAM murdering cult. Look at the East and that is what OBAMA wants for us. You all best use the brain the good Lord gave you and vote for the least of the two evils and hope we the people can make changes the next 4 years if the Republicans can make it... . THINK...
Posted by Abu Aardvark on 09/05/12 12:56 PM
"Ron Paul on the Tonight Show"
Click to view link
Reply from The Daily Bell
Thanks. Should be some show.
Posted by thefinancedude on 09/05/12 01:07 PM
Gary North has been debunked; I wouldn't hang my hat on him.
As an aside, I have looked at CAFR's for 3 years or more off and on. Anytime I bring this up to any financial officer of a municipality, they stop talking. And they like to refer you to the auditors... they do not want to be caught holding THAT bag.
Wake up. Government owns title to everything, cars homes boats... if you registered it, they have TITLE to it!
Perhaps DB needs to do some actual research into the legal coup d'etat that America bought hook line and sinker post Civil war (arguably before sure). Perfect titles have been split and we only ever get equity title... real title is held by the States.
CAFRS represent the sum total of wealth, its the balance sheet. Read any article talking about government finances and they ONLY talk BUDGET... when you need car repairs and you have no room in the budget what do you do? You access your STORED WEALTH (savings etc) or CREDIT. What happened in the last generation is a slow move away from funding using the wealth and instead replacing it with debt/credit on the public books and complaining whenever the easy credit money ran out!
My little community is sitting on 65MILLION in CASH. NOT RECEIVABLES, NOT any other paper accounting gimmick, I'm talking PURE CASH... we have an operating budget of roughly $40M... why do we have 1.5X operating budget IN CASH ALONE? WE ARE NOT A CORP, OR ARE WE?
Let me see an ARTICLE by DB on why/how CAFR's are bunk. In basic finance you have statement of net assets (balance sheet), income statement (budget vs actual) and the statement of cash flows. These are the three basic financial statements and yet all that is spoken in the home of the free (cough, cough) are budgets!
Do some math please and show me where I am wrong.
Reply from The Daily Bell
See Gary North on this.
We've followed it on and off for many years. It's like contrails; there are a lot of opinions but at the end of the day it's not clear.
Anyway, the US is some $200 trillion in debt, so even if one could fully gain access to CAFR funds (that are apparently already pledged) it might not make much of a difference.
Posted by Bluebird on 09/05/12 02:39 PM
My friends! Oh how I have missed you! Thank you!
If Ron Paul is not the most totally honest man he appears to be (and I believe he is), then there is simply no hope for this world. That is not to say that I believe anyone in government can fix this mess; I don't. Only if they get out of the way. I was hoping Ron Paul would help that in some measure.
The Audit the Fed bill may not have accomplished a lot in itself, but it did make people aware of the role the fed plays, as does this great website. If someone is downing Ron Paul, I am always going to wonder about their motives.
Reply from The Daily Bell
Hello, Bluebird, hope all is well.
Posted by dave jr on 09/05/12 03:31 PM
SHEESH! Where should one start with this guy named Richardson?
First he declares we are a defeated people? Should we just roll over and submit?
Then he wants to tell us the facts?
"I am simply telling you the facts: The Federal Reserve System is a government agency that is politically independent (not naturally or lawfully independent)no differently than the Post Office or the Social Security System or many other independent agencies of government."
The President of the US Gov appoints the Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board. How is this politacally independant? And neither is the Post Office or the Social Security System politically independant because non of these entities could stand on their own two feet without the power of the government gun backing their monopolies.
"... and that it is government that holds the wealth and stock ownership of most corporations and banks."
C'mon Mr. Richardson! You can't make such blatant statements without some references to some proof. Show me the proof! Maybe with all the fraudulant bailouts, there is a tiny example, but MOST CORPORATIONS?
"There are no ownership shareholders of the Federal Reserve because the Federal Reserve does not offer ownership stock. Wallmart and Monsanto offer "public" ownership stock, for which people and government has been purchasing for decades."
OH GEEZ! So now there is no such thing as private ownership? And public sale of corporate shares IS NOT GOVERNMENT OWNERSHIP! Sorry, but if I own shares of Walmart, it is still my private ownership, co-owner with other members of the public, not government owned. The government does not own me, and neither by default does it own my property. And if government owns shares of Walmart, then it does so illegally.
"But government corporations do not offer public (ownership) stock, which means that government is not owned."
Well show me in the Constitution where GOVERNMENT CORPORATIONS were consented to. And, yes, I agree; government is not owned, because government was not meant to be a corporation. Rather, it was meant to be a representation of the collection of private indivduals, politically and not a collective of their business or private or corporate earning potential. People (private sector) incorporate, seeking government protection of their ownership rights. If government actually did the job it was created to do, there would be no need of corporation. Instead government uses the "charter" to usurp and confiscate control (ownership) of the private sector, which it has no authority to do or hold.
"Thus, the myth that "corporations own the government" can also be dismissed here. It is quite the opposite, actually. The word "own" is the legal holding of stock of a corporation. So while there is very much a symbiotic relationship between corporations (including banks) and government, the fact is that government owns shares in corporations, and not the other way around."
No, the myth is that corporations can not exist without government. The truth is MONOPOLIES can not exist without government.
"The reality is that at any time government, with the swish of a pen or the dumping of its collective stock, can indeed shut down or make insignificant any corporation it chooses to."
Not legally, at least not against a law abiding corporation. THowever, that power might be held against a crony criminal.
"On the other hand, no corporation can do the same to government."
Why would it care to? Unless, we are talking again of crony capitalism.
In a world where honesty has gone to hell and Machiavelli rules, Richardson makes some sense. But I am not ready to roll over and die just becuase it would be convenient for his ilk.
Posted by widowmaker on 09/05/12 04:11 PM
Not only is Ron Paul a Hoax but he is also an imposter.
Before you toss this and say no how no way, take a look at the CPAC Convention itself, watch and listen as Ryan Sorba, of The Young Californians for Freedom gets hooted at and hollered at by Gay Ron Paul supporters.
Congressman Ron Paul Outed as a Promoter of the Gay Agenda
Exclusive Special Report. Ron Paul Thugs Chant Down Christian and Clamor
to Promote Homosexual Deviancy.
The Conservative Political Action Committee ...
Click to view link
Ron Paul Thugs Chant Down Christian and Clamor to Promote Homosexual Deviancy
The Conservative Political Action Committee (CPAC) is the largest Republican political action committee in America. At its recent national meeting, Ron Paul and his campaign aides were enthusiastically in support of the homosexual agenda for America.
In fact, in 2004, it was Congressman Ron Paul who was one of the only Republicans in the House of Representatives who officially voted in favor of gay marriage!
When questioned about this, Ron Paul's top campaign lieutenant bragged that, "Yes, Ron Paul is socially tolerant," meaning he favors homosexual marriage and other aspects of the homosexual agenda. At the CPAC meeting, Ron Paul's top aides not only invited "GOProud," a radical gay organization to participate, Ron Paul's aides verbally attacked Christians who opposed the gay agenda.
In this film clip, a Christian, Ryan Sorba, condemns the Ron Paul faction and CPAC for inviting the homosexuals and lesbians and promoting their agenda. In return, he gets shouted down by the Ron Paul supporters who are almost uniformly pro-homosexual.
Not only is Ron Paul a promoter of homosexuals, he is also a promoter of the Masonic Lodge and other anti-American groups.
Legionnaires of Sodom-From Ron Paul and Mitt Romney to Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. How Republicans, Democrats, and Libertarians Are Obeying Satan, Tossing America Into a Homosexual Abyss, and Consigning Our Youth to the Scrapheap of History
A Homosexual International controls America's political establishment, and politicians are eagerly swearing and bearing allegiance to the satanic thugs that run this network of sexual and cultural disease. Congressman Ron Paul is outed-He's a Freemasonry kiss-up and a homo defender.
His top aides grovel and explain that yes, Mr. Paul is soft on homosexuality, but only because he's "socially tolerant."
Massachusetts Mitt Romney led "gay pride" parades in Boston and boasted to newspapers, "I'm more pro-gay than Ted Kennedy!" Barack Obama, meanwhile, is alleged to be a bisexual, and it is common knowledge that Hillary Clinton is an activist lesbian. America has become "Sodom and Egypt."
Where are the Christian heroes and men and women of morals who will stand up for decency and protect our children from this overwhelming flood of sadomasochistic evil?
Heroes? Today there are but a few preaching from the pulpits as most feel comforted by using the Constitution which mentions God's name not even once as their standard.
Posted by Weshi007 on 09/05/12 04:27 PM
I'm a simple man with a decent mind and 66 years on the planet. My research includes a study of Andrew Jackson's presidential campaign and opposition to the Bank of the US.,The film," Money Masters", and the warnings of Thomas Jefferson and Lucky Lindy's father who served in the US Congress in 1913, when the modern Fed was reborn.
If the Fed is indeed a government chartered entity, then we really don't have nearly as large a national debt as people have reported. The bonds the Fed has purchased are part of our American investment portfolio if you are correct, and we owe the principal and interest to ourselves.
If the Fed isn't privately owned, and we collectively own it, were not really so bad off are we, or do I have this all mixed up?
The president has so little choice when it comes to appointing a chairman of the Fed and so little control over the chairman's conduct. It's a joke of a process. Greenspan stated that very clearly on several occasions.
Posted by johnblenkins on 09/05/12 05:06 PM
Of-course Goverments hold shares in Corporations; This is proof that
Corps don't own gov? How many banks/corp are but for the grace of
taxpayer austerity driven enslavment, are for the time being seamingly
All of Europes "Democratic" sellout to Privet bond holders was clearly
the wish of the people as valiantly led by our elected leaders and replaced dissidents.
The tiny fact that the Biggest Bankers fund both U.S. parties,
and many unelected Euroleaders are former top bankers is pure
Except tiny Iceland who with pitch fork outside parliment,persueded
any bent politician within not to sell them out, thier children and childrens
ect, down the swany. Look how they are now!
Ron Paul. History will be kind to any who speak the truth,
all be it the Man is ahead of his time. Thoe the world is catching up fast.
If the Fed is a Goverment agency, and gov is a function of the people.
Then it must be incumbernt on the elected powers to ensure a proper audit of all branches of state.
If it is a privet company with no visable accounts or share holders
with carte-blanch to do as it pleases. What the **ck are Gov doing?
Democracy!!? At leaste the Russians and Chineses were under no
illusion that they were mere chatels.
Posted by mark on 09/05/12 06:57 PM
DB - surely when you mention money in the context you do it is currency not money. Money needs to hold its value/purchasing power and fiat currency doesn't hence not money as defined by aristotle for example. Great that the feedback is back on and thanks for what you do
Posted by Hugh on 09/05/12 07:25 PM
Nothing to add today. Just wanted to say glad feedbackers have returned. Ah, the smell of it...
Posted by Danny B on 09/05/12 08:52 PM
Hmmm, I'm just going to put my big toe in this debate. I do a lot of correspondence with Dick Eastman. He believes that Ron Paul is completely honest and genuine. He also believes that he is misguided. Dr. Paul would not be the first political figure to be used as a lightning rod. Perot comes to mind. A lightning rod is used to dissipate harmful energy.
Look at the last election cycle. This cycle went farther but, Dr. Paul didn't hurt anyone. Dr. Paul may very well be honest and consistent but, that doesn't mean that he is accurate.
I have to play the "devil's advocate" for a bit. Yes, the FRN has lost value under the FED's stewardship. All other fiat currencies have lost more.
ALL democracies fail,,, usually after about 150 years. Yes, I know that Iceland is an exception.
The FED was tasked with maintaining stability of the currency AND full employment. These two tasks are at odds.
In essence all governance is socialist. They can only pass out money that they have taken from someone else. "Full employment" was a socialist mandate from GOV.
History proves that when there is GOV control of money printing, there is always too much of a good thing. CB independence is very important in the present scheme of things. That isn't to say that the CB is indispensable.
The House originates all spending bills. Just imagine of they had direct control of the printing presses.
The Grace commission gave congress a working plan to cut the deficit. They completely ignored it. The commission also reported that not one dime of income taxes was used to support GOV.
Click to view link
Credit creation grew at 6 times the pace that the GDP grew. It could have been worse.
Congress decided that it would be a great sin to cut all that waste. Same as it ever was;
"The Tonopah Solar company in Harry Reid's Nevada is getting a $737 million loan from Obama's DOE.
The project will produce a 110 megawatt power system and employ 45 permanent workers.
That's only costing us $16 million per job.
One of the investment partners in this endeavor is Pacific Corporate Group (PCG).
The PCG executive director is Ron Pelosi, who is the brother to Nancy 's husband."
I wouldn't be too hasty to dismiss the CAFR money. When Orange County was on the verge of bankruptcy and demanded much higher taxes, someone read the CAFR report at a public meeting and ended all discussion.
When Wisconsin was all heated up about the approach of bankruptcy, I went to the State site and looked for the CAFR report. It had been taken down from the State site.
The Bell argues that the CBs are no longer necessary. The Central bankers, for their part, have admitted that they have no idea what is going on.
Click to view link
It's great to find support for your argument in unexpected places. :)
EVERYONE is completely oblivious to deflation. The consumer is dead,,,, long live the consumer. No consumption,,, velocity is at a crawl.
Click to view link
We're seeing more of the "Q" word;
Click to view link
The debate is far from settled but, the deflationists seem to be correct in the near term. The inflationists say that the banks have only to loan out their reserves to cause inflation,,, forgetting that nobody wants to borrow because the consumer isn't buying.
The debate rages on.
Posted by olde reb 74 on 09/05/12 10:42 PM
The below message was submitted for moderation at Mr. Clint Richardson's writing RON PAUL HOAX? as the third comment.
Click to view link Perhaps it may be of interest.
Clint, I take you at your word; the truth is the objective.
You have evidenced extensive research. Is there something you might have overlooked?
Specifically, the FRBNY has exclusive handling of the accounting and handling of approximately $8.4 trillion from the auctions of Treasury securities. No public records of the disbursements of those funds are available nor have they ever been audited. If all of those funds were paid to the government of the United States, there would be no increase in the amount of money in circulation nor would there be any increase in the National debt. The flow of money would be the same as money from the public (a taxpayer) to the government. Specifically, the Fed is accused of concealing more than a trillion dollars annually (the value of the National debt) that appears to legally belong to the government. Ref. FEDERAL RESERVE HEIST,
Click to view link
The structure of the Fed has been analyzed to be a Ponzi scheme that will inherently consume the entire wealth of the Nation for the benefit of the (unknown) owners of the BOG. Ref. RIP OFF BY THE FEDERAL RESERVE, Click to view link
Your reflection is invited.
Posted by olde reb 74 on 09/05/12 11:12 PM
As to the ownership of the 'Fed,' we must be very specific as to the object. Title 12, section 221 to 522 is the FR system. Ownership of the 'system' is not believe to be a valid subject.
Sections 341 to 364 create the 12 Federal Reserve Banks. They are each individually incorporated and, for the issues being adjudicated, have been repeatedly held to be private corporations. Ref. Scott v FRB KC, 405 F3d 532.
The FR Board of Governors is created by sections 241 to 252. The specific status of ownership is not known to have been identified. The ownership, and financial records, of a privately held corporation does not have to be publicly identified.
Posted by Danny B on 09/06/12 10:48 AM
Off topic, as usual. DB, here is a bit of ammunition for your anti-CB arguments.
I'm sure that you're aware of Reinhart and Rogoff, "8 Centuries of Financial Folly"
Here is an interesting look at 8 centuries of continuous inflation.
Click to view link
A quick look at the left hand chart shows a huge increase in inflation during the tenure of CBs.
The CBs have pretty much banished deflation. They like to think that they have full control and have banished the business cycle. The "rubber band" has been severely stretched for the last 100 years.
The money-supply growth has been more-or-less parallel to population growth ... the basis of socialism.
Robert Wiedemer accurately predicted many facets of the collapse. He now foresees a 90% reduction in wealth.
Click to view link
So, what does that imply for CBs and socialism?
Posted by johnblenkins on 09/06/12 01:59 PM
A few months ago we all had a good chuckle at Ben telling Ron
Gold was not Money the FED held it for "Tradition"
Funny ha! Gold solid: has been tier 1 100% investment capital for 2 years.
To a selected few, since July to others. They need the real money to get out of the $£it, Euro more so. It ain't about the money.
Debt could be wiped out in many ways.
But those few want to keep the many poor or at least on the edge of misery.
Posted by LloydMiller on 09/06/12 09:27 PM
Sorry guys, there is ownership stock in Federal Reserve. It cannot be bought and sold and does not confir "voting" right. Nor does it confir of share of the profits which, instead, are returned to the Treasury of the US. The ownership is in proportion to capital of the Member Bank. "Members" or "owners" of the Federal Reserve do have the right to vote on members of the various Governing & Advisory Boards, but the top positions are Presidential appointees. Realistically, the FED is a government backed and managed banking cartel.
Posted by James Jaeger on 09/24/12 02:54 AM
Years before I made FIAT EMPIRE and featured Dr. Paul, I used to watch him on C-SPAN. He endlessly argued with Alan Greenspan and few, including myself, knew who he was at this time. But as I watched him over the years I became fascinated as as he seemed to be the only person that actually understood what Greenspan was saying, let alone challenge him. I used to record the C-SPAN arguments between him and Greenspan and I would re-play them over and over (with a dictionary at hand) until I understood what was being argued/discussed.
I can thus assure anyone reading this that a) Dr. Paul understood what he and Dr. Greenspan were saying and b) Dr. Paul was a true irritant to Dr. Greenspan. Given this, he could not have been a plant by some Global Elite. That theory is silly.
For those of you who are not familiar with FIAT EMPIRE, you can watch it at http://youtu.be/5K41O2QfpjA
Posted by thurstjo63 on 10/22/12 06:32 AM
Interesting view although with rather glaring errors. Here's one, "I am simply telling you the facts: The Federal Reserve System is a government agency that is politically independent (not naturally or lawfully independent), no differently than the Post Office or the Social Security System or many other independent agencies of government,".
So since when is politically independent come to mean that the president chooses the Fed Chairman and Congress approves him/her?!? And as for the Fed being a government agency, well I guess those private banks that are shareholders in the Fed have no relevance whatsoever!?!
It always helps if once seeks to be logically consistent in one's definition of independent or government agency, quasi governmental (like Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac - where profits are private but losses are social) or private entities. The truly bizarre part is this idea of Dr. Paul being a fraud, not a true Austrian and/or part of some Global elite. The level of delusion is truly breathtaking!!!
Reply from The Daily Bell
"The truly bizarre part is this idea of Dr. Paul being a fraud, not a true Austrian and/or part of some Global elite. The level of delusion is truly breathtaking!!!"
... A deliberately propagated meme, nonetheless ...