Incoming Stablecoins More Dangerous Than CBDCs

- YouTube YouTube

They Will Turn Your Money Off! Incoming Stablecoins More Dangerous Than CBDCs - Fitts

Daniela Cambone: Hi everyone, welcome back to the Dingella Camboni Show. Well, look, most people who leave Wall Street and Washington either cash out or go out quietly, but Catherine Austin Fitz did neither. She's an investment banker and former US assistant secretary of housing and federal housing commissioner. She spent years in court with the Justice Department after she started asking where the money actually went. Guess what? She won. Then she started publishing what she found. She talks about missing trillions digital money that can just be switched off and facilities most of us have never seen on a map.

Today she's here and we're not going to treat her like a curiosity. We're going to treat her like someone who used to sit in the rooms where the numbers get written. Uh it's a tremendous honor to welcome to the show Katherine Austin Fitz. Katherine,

Catherine Austin Fitts: thank you.

Daniela Cambone: So good to to have you on.

Catherine Austin Fitts: It's great to be on.

Daniela Cambone: You're remind Did Did you ever see the Hamilton show when it was on Broadway?

Catherine Austin Fitts: Of course. Multiple times.

Daniela Cambone: You're reminding me of that song, I want to be in the room where it happens. The room you you Well, I like having people on the show that are in the room where it happens. And uh that's why I was dying to get you on because you've sat on both sides of the table as an investment banker and as a United States Assistant Secretary of Housing and Federal Housing Commissioner. I mean, hello. [laughter]

When did you I mean, you know, you have these incredibly highowered positions, but then you were looking, you know, through the numbers and you realized the official numbers at Real Flows no longer matched. I mean, uh, walk us through that moment. It's the first time you're on the show. I mean, when did that light bulb moment happen for you where you're like, "No, something's seriously wrong here."

Catherine Austin Fitts: So I saw tremendous corruption when I was in the administration and that's why I had to leave because I was being ordered to break the law and I wouldn't. So I had to I had to go.

But I discovered the internet and so I decided to start a company that could use the power of new technology to help democratize basically equity investment and and liquidity. So um you know we were making software tools. One was IPO in a box where small business could form a venture pool and literally with radio dots make their perspectives.

Anyway, so so we had this whole vision of democratizing sort of equity the equity markets and um and what happened was I ran right smack into the fact that the mortgage bubble was growing. We had a contract to be lead financial adviser to the Federal Housing Administration and um and what was happening was there were real shenanigans going on with mortgage fraud as you know and certainly which came out during the financial crisis and we tried to essentially wind it down and stop the corruption inside.

And so we were targeted by the Department of Justice basically to get us out to, you know, to fire us. But also we had done so much in terms of building databases and softwares to map out how the money worked that it was exposing the fraud. And so there was a great effort to steal all of our software and databases and basically keep it under court control for many years and to shut us up.

And you know, there's a great line. I don't know if you've ever seen the movie Gladiator. It's one of my favorite movies and there's a great line where they say to the gladiator before they can kill you they have to kill your name and I had a very good reputation before the litigation started and there was tremendous effort to destroy my name and I realized oh they just can't afford for me to have credibility when it comes to you know the talking about the mortgage fraud.

And it was funny because I tried to warn people about the mortgage bubble and what was happening long before the you know all the way into the financial crisis. And what was amazing was how many people wouldn't listen because I had been discredited and yet you know and when the of course when the bubble popped then it turned out I was right and and there you were.

But it was terrible because you're trying to warn everybody about something that could bankrupt them and and yet they can't hear you and it's it's a terrifying experience.

Daniela Cambone: We'll get right back to the interview, but this is an important moment to ask yourself [music] when the next crisis hits, will you be properly positioned or wish you prepared earlier?

I've spent over two decades reporting on global economic shifts and what's [music] happening now is unprecedented. In moments like this, timely decisions are critical. That's why we've put together [music] the private wealth playbook. It's a free guide showing you how to use Gold and Silver strategically for protection, [music] privacy, and long-term performance.

Click below or visit dannyreport.com to download it now so you can move forward with clarity and confidence. [music]

Now, back to the show. I mean, there's so many questions I have for you, but I find it so commendable the fact that, you know, here you are in this highpowered position, Catherine. I mean, few people would walk away from that, but you couldn't stand it.

Catherine Austin Fitts: So, I had a chance to go back in. You know, repeatedly I would get offers to go back in. But here's the thing. There is a line between civilization and the absence of civilization.

And the interesting thing about me is if you look at the training I had, I really had tremendous training both on Wall Street and in the financial world, you know that if a financial coup starts that they're going to destroy the country. And so you can't go along because you're talking about something that is going to destroy everything that gave you and I and our families the blessings that we enjoy. You you can't you can't destroy, you know, you can't be part of that.

And it was very interesting because when I left the Bush administration, I came out and I said to the people I started the company with, I said, "Look, these guys are going to use the technology to destroy us all. We need a plan B."

And so the the goal of Hamilton Securities was let's create something that can build so much bottomup wealth that these guys don't have to destroy everything. We can find a way, you know, to get the government and the country on a financially sound basis and move forward.

So my idea was not to fight with them. My idea was to provide a pathway that could work for them and everybody. So, you know, with globalization, a way that the middle class could succeed despite globalization.

And what I didn't understand was they were so dependent on criminal cash flows that they couldn't permit that to happen. And I just didn't understand it at that point.

And the litigation was the process by which I learned about the covert side of the house and understood what the issues were in terms of creating a new model because essentially we knew the existing model would have to change. we'd have to do a reset and we're in the middle of a reset.

And my vision was let's create lots of bottomup wealth with new technology. Their vision is let's use new technology to get complete top- down control. And because they're thinking conservatively and risk managers and I'm thinking who would want to live in that world? It's psychopathic.

So um you know so so there were two different visions and I have an online book after the litigation was over I wrote an online book to explain you know the difference between the two visions and what had happened and the sort of the dirty tricks and and the targeting and it was really funny.

I've tried to publish it in hard copy three times and the first two it was sabotaged badly and the third time they threatened if I did it to kill somebody in my family.

Daniela Cambone: So I said oh my lord were you getting an anonymous note? What what the how did the how did that director get

Catherine Austin Fitts: I got three phone calls each with a message but if you put them together that was the message so it's done very it's done very tactically so if I try and you know talk about it in a court of law I won't win

Daniela Cambone: but it is it a voice

Catherine Austin Fitts: no it's three people you know you have three different conversations but they each give you a piece it's like a code and when you put the three pieces together you get the message right so so um anyway so I didn't know if they were serious or not, but I didn't want to test it.

So, I've just left the book online. It's Dylan Reed andco uh.com and it's it's called Dylan Reed in the aristocracy of stock profits. And it's all there. It's all it's not it's not suppressed. They just want it in a hard copy.

Daniela Cambone: Not not to not to not to digress, but um when we talk about, you know, threats and people trying to stop this, you know, stop the exposure of the fraud. Um do you believe it's happening at the government level or is this, you know, talk of deep state stuff? like what what level are we talking about here that we're trying to listen?

Catherine Austin Fitts: You have sort of a permanent government of the intelligence agencies and the enforcement agencies um that's veryworked and and they have both private and public capacity and then you have the political representation which tends not to be the deepest part.

Um and and but you also have tremendous private interests and we've seen much more um privatization of the intelligence and enforcement capacity into you know in into literally corporations that have teams of intelligence agencies working for them.

Daniela Cambone: Okay. I'm I'm going to circle back on exposing the fraud, but let's get into the nitty-gritty here because you talk about $21 trillion that can't be accounted for, right? you know, walk us through that in in plain language of how something I mean, we're not talking about a couple of bucks here, right? How does something that large disappear without the public noticing, Catherine?

Catherine Austin Fitts: So the federal government has never obeyed the or or a new round of laws were passed in the Bush administration in 1991 and then 9293 to institute uh financial disclosure uh for the federal government and a process began in 1996 whereby the federal government announced it wasn't going to obey the law.

So the federal government since 1996 has never once obeyed the laws related to financial disclosure. They are required to have audited financial statements and to publish the audited financial statements and they have never done that. They have refused to do that.

Now you and I both know if a company refused to do that the stock exchange would shut them down. Their bankers wouldn't make their transactions. They wouldn't be able to raise capital in the markets. Right.

Daniela Cambone: Right. Of course.

Catherine Austin Fitts: Right. Okay. But the federal government can keep on borrowing and the federal government bank accounts which are run by the New York Fed and its members as agents for the New York Fed keep running its bank accounts and keep borrowing money in the Treasury market. Right?

So, so you've got a financial entity that doesn't have to obey the financial management laws or provide, you know, proper financial disclosure, which means anything's possible because if I can issue securities without putting it on my balance sheet and I can do, you know, sort of non-disclosed transactions and my banks will do it, of course, anything's possible.

Okay, so here's what happened. In 1995, there was an effort to get the financial uh system and the federal credit on a sound basis, particularly with respect to the baby boomer retirement obligations. The effort failed. It turned out to be a three-w weekek very bitter shutdown of the government.

And that period was later described to me by the president largest pension fund in the country saying, "You don't understand. They've given up on the country. They're moving all the money out starting in the fall."

And what happens the right after that the um the Fed and the New York Fed bought shares in the Bank of International Settlements and then proceeded um starting at the beginning of uh well it was October 1st 1997 large amounts of money started going missing from the federal government.

So it's called undocumentable adjustments and and the Fed the federal government had to publish supposedly financial statements. What they would do every year is publish, we're not going to produce audited financial statements and we have this much in undocumentable adjustments.

Now, what the coverup artists will tell you is, oh, well, those could just be accounting entries. But the reality is if if the department of the army has six times more undocumentable adjustments than they have budget, something is very wrong.

If your church had an annual budget of $500,000, but it was missing $6 million in a year and they said, "Don't worry, it's just accounting transactions," you would force them to produce audited financial statements. Right.

Daniela Cambone: Right. Of course.

Catherine Austin Fitts: Right. So, so what happened was from uh 1998 fiscal year to 2001, uh $4.4 trillion went missing from the federal government. And we all have heard about it because the the day before 911, Donald Rumsfeld got up and said, "There's 2.3 trillion missing from the Pentagon." Remember that? Okay, that was the missing money.

And in fact, on 911, many of the buildings that blew up had records on either the securities, the Treasury market, or the accounting. Um, you know, if you look at the office at the, uh, at the Pentagon was said to be the office where the O and I was doing an investigation on the missing money.

Anyway, so, so, um, after 9/11, people stopped worrying about the missing money. I kept talking about it, but it was not a hot topic coming into the financial crisis.

And then with the financial crisis, people started to realize the extent of the fraud. And um, and not only did you have money going missing from the federal government, but then you added 29 trillion of bailouts. And so people knew something was very wrong.

And and if you look at the size of the bailouts, it was more than three times all the single family mortgages in the country.

Daniela Cambone: So So wow.

Catherine Austin Fitts: So whatever was going on, it wasn't just mortgage fraud. Okay. So So money kept going missing.

And then finally in 2015, in the last year of Obama, um there was an announcement that there were 6.5 trillion missing from the Pentagon, which was the biggest annual number yet.

And I started, you know, I kept talking about it on the radio because at that point I had up to 12 trillion dollars of missing money. And a professor from MSU heard me and uh called me and he heard me on the radio and said, "She has to be wrong."

So he went to the Pentagon and looked at their financial statements and realized, "Oh, I was right." So the money was going missing from the Pentagon and HUD where I had used to work and I knew the financial operation at HUD, you know, inside and out.

Anyway, so so Skidmore called Dr. Skimmore called me and he said, "Can I help?" And I said, "Yeah, let's get your students and do a complete survey of all these years at at DoD and HUD."

We did and he got the number. I had it up to 12 trillion. He found another um he found another 9 trillion so we got it up to 21 trillion and that was at the end of 2015.

So there was tremendous pressure at that point with this kind of attention to get the Pentagon and HUD to produce audited financial statements.

Well, what happened next? You're going to love this, was a little known policy. Remember Kavanaaugh hearings, the Supreme Court hearings with all the sex?

Daniela Cambone: Oh, yeah.

Catherine Austin Fitts: Yeah. Oh, yeah. Okay. Very distracting, very attention getting.

While that was happening, and you will appreciate this, the Congress and the executive branch working together, Democrats and Republic, passed a little known policy called Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board Statement 56, which basically said, I have a big article up about it if you're interested, but it basically said that the federal government by a secret process and a secret group of people could take a secret amount of the financial statement out of the financial statements and keep it secret and not only do it for the 24 covered agencies but for 150 plus governmental entities.

And wait get this with the national security laws and the classification uh classified laws they can then add the big banks and contractors who do business with the federal government.

Now what you will understand because of your background and the show that you do that means the vast majority of the issuers in the US bond market and the large cap stock market

Daniela Cambone: have secret books

Catherine Austin Fitts: right secret books. So I used to plow through the financials of the US government and HUD and DoD and from that time on I stopped looking because who knows what it means? You don't know. It's like that it's make believe.

Daniela Cambone: Well, I I I Well, I'm wondering, well, who's who's lining their who lined their pockets the most?

Catherine Austin Fitts: So, uh, so, so there are a couple things going on. The first thing is you you've grown since the 47 and 49 act, you've grown something called the black budget, which is a secret or covert part of the economy. And it's grown and grown and grown. That's number one.

And it's, you know, it's there's so much that's secret and and as it's grown, it's benefited a huge number of people. Like a lot of the technology in Silicon Valley, I believe, based on understanding the black budget was transferred, you know, was financed by the ta taxpayers, but transferred to these corporations.

So, they're real issues as to, you know, who should really own what. But, um, so this part of the secret part of the economy has grown and grown and grown.

But then in 1995, I think what happened was they gave up on the current structure of the government and they literally decided to engineer a coup.

And the way you do that is you you keep the existing system going, but you transfer as many assets as possible into a new system and then you bring up the new system and then you slowly, you know, dissolve the existing system.

And and the way I would describe that is in the existing system the bankers run monetary policy and fiscal policy. In the new system the bankers want to run both monetary and fiscal policy. So they want control of the fiscal side of the house and they want to keep a lot of the economy secret.

Daniela Cambone: and and and and that's where we are today Katherine.

Right. And I don't I don't want to forget this question because um you spoke of these distractions and that's how they were able to do it like psychops if that's another word you want whenever they're selling like the Kavanaaugh hearings I'm like what are they really doing right what what's the what what do you think is the equivalent in today's environment okay of a news that we're being fed that's the Kavanaaugh moment

Catherine Austin Fitts: there there are two things that we need to know first of all the game with energy And if you go to Celier, we have something called the energy timeline and trade bottlenecks. You can look at it and it will describe everything.

The the energy gain going on in the planet is co 2.0. It's a way of dramatically shifting market share out of the little guys into the big guys and centralizing power. And it's part of the US moving from a an open trade model globally to a closed trade model. And it it revolves around controlling energy.

So, so you know, COVID 1.0 was health. Now we're doing energy. Yeah. Okay. And it it's all about, you know, who controls what and so, uh, take a look at that energy timeline. I think that's the important one important thing to understand.

The second important thing to understand is we are watching the organi the legal organization and preparation of the largest bubble-blowing machine we have ever seen in the financial markets with the implementation of programmable money and digital tokens.

And if you look at what they're planning to do, you know, people who say the bubble's about to collapse, the bubble's about to collapse. And the bubble right now is ridiculous.

But if you look at the bubble machinery they are building and they are planning on launching at the beginning of next year. I don't know if it'll work because this is the most outrageous bubble plan I have ever seen in my life.

And I have seen a lot of bubbles. I've seen a lot of bubbles. But and if this succeeds, if this succeeds, you are going to see a tsunami of you're going to see explosive bubbles all over the planet.

And and here's what I'm going to describe it. I'm going to give you a brief overview and then we can dive in. Okay?

Daniela Cambone: And that was nervous laughter, by the way, on my part. Okay?

Catherine Austin Fitts: So So retail is leaving the Treasury market, right? And and so we see Norway saying they're going to sell government sovereign bonds including treasuries blah blah blah. So so institution is selling.

If you look at what the Treasury plans to do with stable coins, they plan to market stable coins into retail all over the planet in a way that will bring in they think by the end of the decade three to four trillion dollars into the treasury market.

Now, that's not a lot of treasury market, but you're talking about drawing retail in in a way that you create crypto accounts. It's crypto rails and you can pump out enormous leverage to all four billion customers, right?

So, if you remember, you're probably too young to remember the way that the Germans unified Germany after the wall came down in '89. They just offered a sweet premium for the tender and for the for the East Germans and the East Germans overnight got like a stock tenders for another company.

The West Germany tendered for the Eastern Germans through the currency and boom, they unified overnight.

The US is planning on marketing dollars through crypto rails all over the planet to anybody they can reach on Google Pay, Apple Pay, mobile payment phones. And my suspicion is they're going to be exceptionally generous with leverage.

Think of this as the pallets of cash that went out to Iraq, except this time it's going out on the crypto rails.

Now, hold that thought for a second. They are working to build digital tokens for stocks and bonds. Coinbase has said, you know, and some of the other crypto firms, we're going to offer the big cap US stocks with 20 times margin on digital tokens.

So imagine four billion people and and Armstrong has said we can we can bring four billion new people into the US stock markets.

So imagine you're offering 20 time margin on the crypto rails. You bring in four billion people to the US stock and bond market.

Mark Andre about a month ago tweeted out, you know, uh our current stock market is 68% of the global stock market. Unless something goes horribly wrong, you know, within a reasonable period of time, we're going to be 90%.

That's what he means. He means we're going to go out and try and get people all over the world into our channel.

Daniela Cambone: Okay. So, two two points I find. Okay. Let's talk. A lot of your thesis is centered around digital central bank digital currencies. Um,

Catherine Austin Fitts: no stable coins through stable coins. stable coins and digital tokens.

Daniela Cambone: I feel uh and tell me if you agree with me or not. At one point, you know, and the ECB has spoken, you know, Christine Lagarde has spoken about uh moving to moving the euro to digital currency.

And in the US, we were speaking about it heavily at one point, I would say, under the Biden administration. And all of a sudden, it really uh kind of went away magically. people stop talking about it, right?

But you see it coming as soon as possibly next year, Katherine.

Catherine Austin Fitts: So, no, it's here. It's here. So, you know,

Daniela Cambone: but the use of it, the use of it.

Catherine Austin Fitts: Yeah. So, so let's talk about So, so programmable money that is used to control us is the problem. And it doesn't matter whether it comes in the form of a CBDC or it comes in the form of a stable coin or it comes in the form of a Visa credit card that can be used in the same way.

We don't really care. We just don't want to be controlled, right?

So, so there are a couple problems with the CBDC. One is a CBDC requires authorizing legislation for Congress and in this kind of environment, you're not going to get it. That's number one.

But number two, uh, if you can do programmable money through stable coins, which are privately issued, the problem with the CBDC is the Fed is a creature of Congress and if they do something that Congress doesn't like, Congress can pull the rug out from under them, shut them down, require disclosure, and under the law, they have public policy obligations.

If if instead rather than going through the central bank, I go through private stable coins.

Daniela Cambone: Yes.

Catherine Austin Fitts: where they are mandated to do whatever Treasury tells them to do in terms of applying the central controls and the rules. Then I have the same as Twitter censorship.

I have government control, but I have private issuers that can say, "Well, I'm not subject to p public policy obligations. I'm not subject to FOIA. I'm not subject to any of these rules."

And you've got something which is far more dangerous because then the people who control them can griff to their hearts content and skim and do a whole lot of stuff that would be much harder to do with central bank digital currency.

So the stable coin plan has turned out to be far more dangerous. I mean I hate CBDC but the stable coins are far more dangerous than CBDC.

Daniela Cambone: Um if I could put you in a room alone with Scott uh Bessant, right? No microphones, no cameras, nothing. What's the one thing you'd want to tell him?

Catherine Austin Fitts: Well, I'd want to ask him questions.

Daniela Cambone: Ask him. What would you want to ask him?

Catherine Austin Fitts: I would say, if you're planning on marketing$4 trillion dollars of stable coins to the world, why did you brag about being able to seize the wallets of a billion dollars, a billion dollars worth of wallets of Iranian wallets?

Why why would you market that way? What's what was that about? That's what I would ask him.

And then I'd ask him why he illegally gave Musk all the data from IRS and the payment systems.

Daniela Cambone: Interesting. Interesting.

Catherine Austin Fitts: I'm pretty sure I know why he did, but you know, I'd still ask him.

Daniela Cambone: I I want to I always want to give my audience tools, right? They walk away from this like let's say if we have a family of four watching, they have $8,000 in savings, let's say a mortgage.

What do you think? What would you tell them is the single most useful thing they could do this month?

Catherine Austin Fitts: Here's what they must do. They What's important is not what the price of your asset is. What's important is that it's your asset and it doesn't have a leash and somebody can take it away, right?

So when you think about portfolio strategy and managing your assets, you want to focus on what are the assets that are very hard. You you don't want to make it easy for people to take your stuff, right?

The first thing you need to do that the kind of auto I call it the automatic third lock which is what they're trying to put into place with respect to our currency or our digital assets what you want to do is you want to keep the system from going all digital.

Okay. So if there's one thing you want to do you want to preserve cash and you want to preserve analog systems. you know, whether you're trading, you know, gold coins or you're doing barter or you're using cash, right? Whatever your systems are, that's number one.

Number two, we have a book at Ceri called Coming Clean. It's free. You can come in and you can download it and it's full of uh it's like a buffet of all the things you can do to get the bad guys out of your head, out of your home, out of your heart, out of your wallet, out of your life.

And you want to build as much personal resiliency in terms of food, in terms of health, in terms of who you depend on, who you associate, where you bank, etc., etc. to give yourself as much personal resiliency as possible.

So, I'll get I'll tell you a funny story.

During the litigation before it started, I had gifted, you know, I was on Wall Street. I had a great career. I loved making money, made a ton of money. And whenever anybody in my family was in trouble or needed help, I would just help them. It's like that's what you have money for, to help your friends, right?

So, so when the litigation started, I they tried to cut off all my credit, all my, you know, completely control me and cut off my resources, cut off my income.

And my family got together and and I had an uncle who bought some of my farmland from me. He was wealthy. And so they targeted him and showed up at his door in the middle of the night with a subpoena and tried to scare him into not helping me.

And so the family had a a big pow-wow by phone. Yeah.

And everybody said, "Well, we're going to drop her because otherwise they're going to target us."

And Michael said, "I'm not going to drop her because she always helped us. If we were in trouble, she helped us. And now if she's in trouble, I'm going to help her."

Well, it turned out that I had I didn't even know how much I'd gifted her loan, but I had gifted her loan 250,000 to family and friends. And over the next 11 years, 200 they either paid back or gifted back exactly 250,000.

I didn't realize it until we won the litigation. I got the money in and I said, "Okay, I'm going to pay everybody back that helped."

And I did the numbers and I realized I had loaned or gifted 250,000 and then for 11 years that money had been repaid or gifted back and if it wasn't for that money I wouldn't have made it. I would have been dead. There was no way I would have made it without that money.

So when the money came in I had had a 401k that I'd had to bust and pay half the money in taxes and fees and it was 500,000. I had to pay 225,000 of taxes and fees to get it.

And um and my CPA said, "Let's fund up the 401k."

And I said, "No, I'm going to take that 500,000 and I'm going to bonus it out on the people bank because that is the only bank I trust. That is the only bank when the you know what hits the you know what that that they can't shut off."

And so one of the things I learned as an investment advisor, we're trained to put all of our money in the brokerage account and not help our kids or our grandkids or our family.

Wrong. You want to identify the people in your life that you can trust and you want to support and back them and that's what gives us resiliency.

So I just have to say this because I was telling you how much I love the Italian people. You can't do to the Italian people what you can do to the Americans because the Italians they support and and finance their families internally.

They have much more resilience because you can't bust those family ties. Right. And that's why Right. Right. They they know how to play the game. They've lived through up and down empires. They know.

Daniela Cambone: Oh, hell yes.

Catherine Austin Fitts: And that's what Americans have to learn. Americans have to learn, you know, we're in a war and we need to circle up with each other and and find the people we can trust and build resiliency together.

Daniela Cambone: And because so true, right? If you look at the things we need, food, health, you know, finance, all these things, what you need are people you can trust in the health area, people you can trust in the food area.

You're talking about building that community. And it's so true that the Italian people, you know, I I I witness it and I'll have a funny story I'll tell I'll tell you one day.

Um, but because we can't stop this programmable money train, Katherine. So, you talk about

Catherine Austin Fitts: I I'm an optimist. So I think we can for two reasons. One is it is possible to put up guard rails legislatively within states to do so.

It is also possible to keep the financial system from going all digital. If we can keep enough analog alive that they can't go all digital, we create options.

But the third reason, and this is a longer term reason, if you look at what they're trying to do in terms of central control, I absolutely believe it will fail because the notion that you can use digital technology to control the entire universe is absurd.

And and I just think their model is going to fail. So, but I don't

Daniela Cambone: I think that's the only thing we can bank on.

Catherine Austin Fitts: Right. Right.

Daniela Cambone: Because you're proof. You're proof. You're someone who went into government hoping to make a difference, you know, with with good intentions, and those people get cut out. The moment you start exposing fraud or, hey, something's fishy over here, you're out.

Catherine Austin Fitts: Well, but here's the thing.

Daniela Cambone: So, how am I supposed to have any faith in the system?

Catherine Austin Fitts: Well, I I don't have faith in in the existing institutions. With rare exception, I do have faith in people, and I do have faith in what people can do if they organize in effective ways.

So, so let me give you an example. If I was to go to a data center, our third quarter wrap-up's going to be on data centers.

If I was to go to a data center protest, I would see a thousand people and if I said to them, give me a copy of your IRA and 401k. What I could prove to them is they're financing the data centers, right?

But here's the thing. If they get smart, and this is going to be in our third quarter wrap-up, how to do it. If they got smart and said, you know something, I'm going to stop financing the data centers. I'm going to stop financing the companies that are poisoning my kids.

I'm going to stop and instead I'm going to start financing companies that are productive and are making money or good companies, right?

And I shifted my money. If we shifted our bank deposits away from the banks that did the financial crisis and did the 21 trillion missing money, if we fa we stopped financing the companies that are poisoning our kids or poisoning us.

If we stopped financing the bad guys and started financing, you know, things that would provide us with the food and health and other things we need are just good companies.

There's a there's a ton of good companies in the world. If we would finance the good guys and stop financing the bad guys, there would be a revolution. There would absolutely be a revolution.

We can't vote our way out of it, but we can shift our money and that could have a profound impact.

Daniela Cambone: Um, just one final point. I know we went over time with you today, Katherine. I know you have limited time. I would I'm going to have to bring you back, but um just your point about the bubbles of all bubbles.

You've seen many um is this just your thoughts on is that what leads to this financial reset that many experts feel is inevitable or do you feel we're already in?

Catherine Austin Fitts: So, we're in the in the res the reset started in August 2019 with the going direct reset. We have a big wrap-up and and a summary on Cileria on the going direct reset.

So the central bankers met in Jackson Hole in August of 2019, reviewed a plan prepared by a group of central bankers through the Black Rockck Investment Institute called the going direct reset and co one point you know co the pandemic was sort of a first big piece because they injected five to six trillion into the economy and then they shut down the small business and farms.

Yeah. to create the offsetting deflation and that meant you know Wall Street I'm grossly oversimplifying could take the six trillion and go buy all the assets the people had been shut down and were in a corner. So it was a way of consolidating control upstairs.

Right now we're in what I call CO 2.0 with the energy game, but it's it's a you know it's a it's a long-term fundamental re-engineering.

I have a wrap-up that I published in 2018 called um uh the state of our currencies and it's about the end of currencies and what they were going to do with the digital control grid and I described the resets historically so I knew a reset was coming and then when you know when it started in 2019 I was like okay here it is.

But this is an old game because every hundred every 80 to 120 years the central banks do a reset and every time they go into a reset they try you know um assert control of capital of labor and travel and then centralize uh you know capital and and and do a reset.

The thing about this reset though is this is the end of currencies if they get a complete digital control grid. And so we're talking about com, you know, the end of financial liquidity available to the majority of the population which I for one am going to do everything I can to prevent.

Daniela Cambone: Katherine Austin Fitz, you are a force. You are a dynamo. And uh thank you so much for your time today. Please come back.

Catherine Austin Fitts: I definitely will. This was a pleasure. It was a pleasure to finally get to meet you in person. Well, not really in person, but

Daniela Cambone: as good as it gets. Katherine Alston Fitz, thank you so much. And thank you all for watching. And of course, uh if you have any questions, reach out to my wonderful team at ITM Trading.

We spoke so much about the importance of owning uh physical gold through through everything that's coming our way. Uh we'll see you soon.