by Joseph P. Farrell, Giza Death Star:
For the past few years, Catherine Austin Fitts has been warning people about what she calls the “dollar trap,” which basically amounts to a one-two punch. Punch one: extend easy credit or outright give away billions of dollars. In other words, get entire regions or countries “hooked on” or addicted to dollars. Punch two: then, pull the plug, and suction out all those dollars, leaving the region or country in a bind, where it must conduct transactions in dollars, and does not have any.
TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/
She and I (and others) have also been warning about something else, namely, the typical modus operandi of Mr. Globaloney to “stack function” in an operation or scam, or as I call it, to carry out “multiple objective” operations, where several goals are met and fulfilled all in one fell swoop.
With those background thoughts in mind, consider this article about the recent FTX crypto-scandal and its collapse, shared by K.H.:
Beyond the entirely apropos picture of Randolph and Mortimer Duke (Ralph Bellamy and Don Amice) from the hit movie Trading Places, and beyond the author’s scathing words about the whole concept of crypto-“currency” (and one assumes, by extension, the idea of “digital cash”), sentiments with which, incidentally, I am in wholehearted agreement, the author has outlined a rather intriguing scenario behind FTX, one which intriguingly plays quite well into Ms. Fitts’ “Dollar trap” scenario and into our idea of “multiple objective operations,” or what she calls “stacked functions.”
This is where FTX comes in:
What if FTX did not find itself in this situation by unfortunate circumstance?
What if it was built for this?
What if FTX was created to eat Ponzi schemes in the wild and deplete them of any actual cash they had? Because the whole project was actually architected by those who don’t really believe in crypto?
It just had to survive long enough to eat all of the major Ponzis in the space. Extracting all the cash and paving the way for regulatory pushback.
It would go something like this:
- Create a crypto exchange
- Become a market maker and mover
- Pretend to be US compliant by having a placeholder US presence (FTX.us)
- Maybe make a stablecoin (was in progress)
- Definitely make a market traded token (FTT)
- Liquify the token with dollars (USDT)
- Target Ponzicoin projects with proven real world cash reserves
- Advance them liquidity via FTT
- Securitize the loans with their cash
- Extend their runways, allowing them to keep aggregating cash
- Wait for their collapse
- Take their cash, book a loss
- Repeat
Do this until you have wiped out all the major players and have set the stage for a changing of the guard.
This money eating machine was always destined to fail. But so was the market it played in. Perhaps the creators of FTX decided to roll up all the Ponzis in a giant mega-Ponzi and extract all the cash for as long as possible.
So far so good: as what ifs and high octane speculations go, it’s as good as any: but it has only one goal or objective, namely, drain the crypto-world of its “liquidity”. By this time, however, you’re probably familiar with all those stories that have begun to circulate about how much of FTX’s dollars came from “investments” in the Ukraine, and was then funneled back to the United States where it was exchanged for real dollars, which real dollars ended up being funneled to Democratic candidates in the recent (and in my opinion highly questionable) mid-term election. And lest we forget, the effort was entirely “bi-partisan”, because some of that very same money apparently ended up in Senate Minority leader Mitch McConnell’s (R Kentucky) warchest and went to support “non-MAGA” candidates.
So now look what we have:
