40 to turn us into slaves. Technology is the way that they are going to try to do it. So it should come as no surprise, if we look back at the markets from that point of view that what they are going to be setting up is a system of constant intervention. This is exactly what we are looking at. It is caused by intervention everywhere. Fitts: Right, but to control markets you need to control people one at a time. That’s how they’re doing it. Farrell: That is how they are going to do it. Fitts: And to make the economics work, you need to harvest people one at a time. The reason I keep hammering on the Constitution is because that is their biggest obstacle. They are trying many different roads to tear it up or bring it down. One of the reasons they feel a real urgency to do so is because they don’t want to pay the $21 trillion back. Farrell: Right and they are liable for it. Fitts: Under the Constitution, we have a legal mechanism to get that money back. I’ll give you an example. I litigated, as you know, for ten or eleven years with the Federal government over issues, and one of the issues was that they asserted the right to seize $2.3 million of money owed to my company, they asserted the seizure of that money with a common law right of offset, and they asserted that if a loan sale – which had made them a fantastic amount of profit – or something other had happened, we might have made them $2.3 million. So it was a theoretical opportunity cost; it was not cash. So we’re not even talking about cash; we’re talking about a theoret- ical opportunity cost – like $21 trillion of undocumentable adjustments. They asserted a common law right of offset to grab $2.3 million of our cash to offset against a theoretical opportunity cost. If you take that theory, the Federal govern- ment has the right to assert a common law right of offset against the New York Fed, the New York Fed member banks, the San Francisco Fed, and the San Francisco Fed banks because they have transacted $21 trillion of illegal transactions intentionally and knowledgeably, as have the different defense contractors who run those payment systems. So people say, “We could never get that back.” Of course we could get it back. We have a legal mechanism. All you have to do is assert a common law right of offset. Farrell: Exactly. This is why I am so skepti- cal of all of this. Return to the Constitution and what it says about the debts incurred by the government under the previous Constitutional system – under the Articles of Confederation. All of those were to be carried over. A Constitutional Convention could con- ceivably wipe all of that off the books, and you could simply walk away from it all. In the process of walking away from it all, strip everybody of their property rights and leave every one of us under the gun to the people who committed the crime in the first place. This is all interconnected, and I hope that is what people take away from all of this. Fitts: That is why we had the cartoon in the 2nd Quarter Wrap Up because I wanted to make a comic book of this. The financial coup is not over. Whether it was the inter- net pump and dump or the missing money, you have $27 trillion or some amount of money on the bailouts. You have the $21 trillion of missing money. You have the pump and dump of the tech market and other things, so let’s call it $50 trillion. You have the $50 trillion, but you still have liabilities. If you look at the liabilities on the government balance sheet – whether it’s the debt or all of the different commit- ments – you have your liability to the trust fund because the trust fund is not a gov- ernment entitlement or benefit. The social security trust fund represents money paid in and it belongs to them. What is sitting there is an asset, which is a debt of the US government. You have military pension funds; you have food stamps, and all of these commitments that you’ve made. If you can tear up those commitments, you would double your profit. It’s like winning the lottery twice. So you’ve stolen $50 trillion, but you need to tear up $50 trillion in liabilities if you’re going to get away with the assets. Then you want to be able to do whatever you want to manage the people because, if you look at the corporate stocks in the Fortune 500, they’ve been going up steadily. From 1955 to 1995, they tracked with the GNP and since then, they’ve gone up fantastically faster. The reality is that they can’t keep do- ing that without starting to strip and steal very directly and boldly. It’s been happen- ing quietly and covertly, and now you have to get out front. You’re talking about significant social and political re-engineering, but if you look at where they want to go, in terms of chipping people and making money digitally, this is why they want to get rid of cash. Farrell: Absolutely, with cash, you have a measure of privacy and a measure of sovereignty. Without cash, you’re essential- ly dealing – and we’ll probably be getting back to this in Part II – with a system that has no oversight and is being run by the very same people who have robbed us blind already. Fitts: So let’s look at the profit: I steal $50 trillion, then to make that $50 trillion worth a great amount, I tear up my $50 trillion of obligations. Then when I do that, I implode the economy so that I can turn around and buy everything for pennies on the dollar. Then it’s a triple play. What do they call it in the lottery when you hit a triple play? Farrell: They call it ‘fraud’. Fitts: I think that for many people it’s hard to imagine that someone would have the hubris to do this. Farrell: I think that the average person on the street thinks that is too gargantuan to be able to pull off. These people have docu- mented all of this, they’ve told us about the missing money, they’ve told us about these adjustments in the Federal budget, and it’s reached the stage now of trillions of dollars – more than the gross domestic product of the United States. Fitts: More than the outstanding debt. Farrell: Even there, let’s look back at the bailouts when we found out there were $14 to $17 quadrillion worth of derivatives sloshing around in the system. That is in VI. News Trends & Stories with Dr. Joseph Farrell