A Seismic Shift

Transferring Power From the Banks ... To the People

In my last article, I talked about the importance of safeguards for the future of America. It involved an example from the past of a great leader in Costa Rica named José “Pepe” Figueres who placed constitutional safeguards in place to prevent an insurgency and protect the peoples rights in his country.

It gave the power back to the people and has gone a long way toward preventing another government controlled by a global cabal.

How did “Don Pepe” give the power back to the people in Costa Rica? He accomplished it by permanently protecting elections with an ID only given to citizens, which prevented anybody else from voting. He also did it by creating a permanent “public banking option” that prevented private banks from controlling the government. These “publicly owned” banks protect the peoples savings from being stolen or controlled by private bankers.

I ended that article talking about a public bank in the United States most people didn’t know existed. It’s the only one of its kind.

It’s the state Bank of North Dakota.

The public Bank of North Dakota has been in place since 1919. It has lasted more than a hundred years, and most people don’t know anything about it.

What’s the history of this bank?

According to VOX.com:

In the 1900s, North Dakota was, not unlike today, a place overlooked between the already established East Coast and rapidly developing West. The state was largely settled by farmers, who spread themselves sparsely. The low population density meant that local financial institutions had trouble taking root. In effect, North Dakota was a banking desert.

That decentralization, combined with the predatory nature of the gilded age — an era of economic deregulation and extreme income inequality — left North Dakota’s fledgling economy vulnerable to the whims of corporate banks. Financial capitals such as Chicago and Minneapolis could inflate farmers’ loan rates or undercut grain prices without fear of reprise.

“A lot of your economic livelihood would be, for lack of a better word, controlled by out-of-state interests who may not have the best interests of the local producers in mind,” said David Flynn, the economics and finance department chair at the University of North Dakota.

North Dakota was considered a “banking desert” at the time because the private corporate banks didn’t see much profit in servicing the people of the state. Its small population, mostly farmers, had few choices when it came to loans or other financial services; they were at the mercy of predatory lenders and were being ripped off and taken advantage of by big out of state banks.

The same thing still happens to the many poor people in America today, who lack access or choices in financial institutions.

The movement to start a public bank in North Dakota was about removing control by out of state bankers over the people.

How successful has the public bank been during its history?

According to InTheseTimes.com:

One hundred years ago July 28, a bank in Bismarck, N.D., opened its doors for the very first time. This would have been an unremarkable event, likely lost to history, except for the fact that it was a public bank, owned by all the residents of the state. A century on, the Bank of North Dakota (BND) is still the only publicly owned bank in the continental United States.

It is a public bank that is owned by the residents of North Dakota and has been around for over a century. It has survived the Great Depression, the Savings and Loan scandal in the 1980s and the credit crisis of 2008.

Why?

Because it’s purpose was to serve the people of North Dakota, not Wall Street or the federal government. It gave the people local control over the banking system in North Dakota and limited their risk.

More from InTheseTimes.com:

Rather than having public funds be extracted from local communities to fuel Wall Street speculation, public banks can ensure that those funds are used to stabilize local economies and support local public priorities. As Ellen Brown, chair of the Public Banking Institute, writes in her new book, Banking on the People, ​“a public banking system … can fund the goods, services and infrastructure required to satisfy the needs of the people and the economy without unsustainable debt, taxation or environmental degradation.”

This public banking option helps shield the people from risky Wall Street speculation, unsustainable debt and taxation.

But what were the specific reasons that drove the people to create a public bank and are there similar reasons to start a movement nationwide for public banking today?

More from InTheseTimes.com:

That a public bank is resonating with people across the United States today shouldn’t be surprising. If we look back at the conditions that led a diverse group of farmers, socialists and populists to struggle against the odds to create the BND in the first place — corporate domination, an economy hobbled by debt burdens, gaping inequalities, ineffective reformists, bought politicians —we find they are remarkably similar to those we face today in our new ​“gilded age.”

Did you catch the similarities from way back then, to what’s happening today?

1. Corporations in bed with the government and dominating the people.

2. Our economy is being strangled by massive debt.

3. Huge inequality between the wealthy and the poor.

4. Nobody really trying to change anything because our government is completely corrupt.

The public banking option is the safest option in times of financial crisis and the Bank of North Dakota has proven it.

More from InTheseTimes.com:

Between 1919 and 1933, the BND lent almost $41 million to more than 16,000 farmers in the state, and during the Great Depression the bank helped the state uniquely sustain itself and recover quickly (foreshadowing similar success in helping the state withstand the 2008/09 financial crisis).

While school teachers across the country were being paid essentially in IOUs that were typically redeemed with a 15% loss, the BND was able to pay them in full. In the 1940s, farmland that was foreclosed on during the Depression was sold back, in many cases, to the same families that lost them.

Can you see how the public bank served the people instead of the banks in times of crisis?

The public bank was a SAFEGUARD during both the Great Depression and the 2008 financial crisis. Can you imagine how different our history would have been, had each state established their own publicly owned bank to protect the sovereignty of the people in their states?

But there are other big benefits for having the public bank option.

What are they?

The public Bank of North Dakota returns a portion of its profits to the general fund, which not only lowers taxes, but also helps fund things like infrastructure projects. They’ve given back more than a billion dollars over their history.

The Bank of North Dakota also offers lower cost student loans for their state residents. That promotes education, creates more local control and gives power back to the people.

North Dakota owns the only public option bank in the country and unfortunately, not everyone has access to it.

Is that about to change?

A movement has started recently nationwide. Let’s go back to the VOX article from earlier.

According to VOX.com:

That success has drawn the attention of California, where a movement to create a public bank has gained prominence — with both successes and failures — since 2018.

The differences in size, economy, and population of California and North Dakota are unmistakable. But many of the characteristics of the modern economic landscape are eerily similar to that of a century ago when BND first passed: increasing income inequality and predatory practices on the part of financial institutions.

There is a movement for a public bank option in California.

Does that surprise you? How about in other states?

More from VOX.com:

There have been efforts to establish public banks in nearly two dozen other states. This year alone, four state legislatures besides California — New York, New Mexico, New Hampshire, and Massachusetts — have introduced bills to create or explore creating public banks. None, however, have passed.

There is a growing movement, but so far, all efforts have been stymied.

Can Trump change that?

How could Trump quickly create a public banking option to compete with private banks and protect the peoples savings deposits across the entire country?

Did you know that there was a public savings option throughout the United States in the past?

This public savings option existed before the establishment of the Federal Reserve. It began in 1911 and lasted up until 1967.

You’ll never guess where it was located.

Have you ever heard of the Postal Savings System?

According to the Roosevelt Institute:

During much of the 20th century, those without access to traditional banks didn’t need to rely on predatory nonbank businesses.

For more than 50 years, the US operated a hugely popular and secure public option through the Postal Service. Created in 1911 before the Fed was founded, the Postal Savings System relied on local banks to manage accounts, and allowed all Americans to make deposits into no-cost savings accounts at post offices. The deposits earned interest, and the original deposit limit of $500 was raised to $2,500 by 1918.

The Post Office allowed all Americans to deposit their money into “no-cost” savings accounts. Their deposits even earned interest, so it encouraged savings. The only drawback was that Congress “limited” the amount of money Americans could deposit into their postal savings accounts.

The Postal Savings system was created before the Fed and as you can imagine, the private bankers didn’t like the competition. Then came the market crash and the Great Depression.

How well did the Postal Savings System operate during the country’s biggest financial crisis?

More from the Roosevelt Institute:

During the Great Depression, when the public—justifiably—lost faith in private banks, the Postal Savings System was a uniquely safe and reliable alternative. By 1947, more than 4 million people had $3.4 billion in savings in more than 8,000 postal units.

This is why public banking is so important. Even during the Great Depression, when the private banking system collapsed, Postal Savings accounts were “uniquely safe and reliable.” They became even more popular during the Great Depression.

This is valuable history that has been strategically hidden from the American people by the same private bankers who now control our media and government.

A public banking option is a great safeguard for the American people.

Why not do it again?

By 1947, more than 4 million Americans had $3.4 billion saved in only 8,000 Post Offices. Guess how many post offices there are around the country today? There are over 30,000 separate post offices, and unlike private banks, they serve every community in the country.

This is how you change the banking system and give the power back to the people.

Banking should be a public service, not just a service to enrich private bankers.

But guess what helped to end the Postal Savings accounts in 1967?

It was the same thing I talked about in a previous article—a cabal trick called “Federal Deposit Insurance.”

More from the Roosevelt Institute:

However, during the post-WWII economic boom, when interest rates at private banks rose, and after the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) offered depositors at private banks some guarantee, usage of the Postal Savings System declined and the program was discontinued in 1967.

We’ve been tricked into believing Federal Deposit Insurance is a good thing because it protects the little guy, but that is a lie.

Private banks didn’t always have deposit insurance, so they were risky. When the government took away that risk by insuring deposits in private banks, it removed the competitive advantage that the Postal Savings system had over private banks, so people began to use them less. Public savings accounts were now at a competitive disadvantage because private banks could offer higher interest on their savings deposits through riskier investments, and those deposits were now protected by tax payers money. That helped kill the public banking option.

The government got rid of the Postal Savings system, and we’ve had nothing but one financial crisis after another. All of them are created by the private banks and then those bank failures are bailed out using tax payers money.

Here’s the lie when it comes to FDIC insurance: they tell us FDIC is funded by banks themselves, but nobody mentions the decades of back door bailouts for the banks using money from the Federal Reserve. It’s still happening today. That’s taxpayer money the Fed hands to Wall Street banks so they can profit by pumping up the stock market.

It is a rigged system with no competition and no control by the people.

There is another benefit of a return to Postal Savings Accounts.

What is it?

According to Cheddar News:

One potential benefit is that it would help consumers avoid predatory non-bank options such as payday lenders and check cashing companies, which millions of Americans rely on.  

The most recent data from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) found that 6.5 percent (8.4 million) of U.S. households were "unbanked," meaning they had no bank account, and 18.7 percent (24.2 million) were "underbanked," meaning they had a savings or checking account but still went outside the banking system for some financial services. 

The nationwide footprint of USPS, which tracks with population centers as opposed to commercial activity, offers a way to reach this vulnerable population quickly. 

"The 30,000 post office locations are an ideal way to provide core banking services and money payment services to many of the people who do not have bank accounts," Armstrong said. "That's why it's so attractive, because of the physical locations." 

It would eliminate predatory non-bank options because the Post Office could offer the same services for free, or at a much lower cost. It would help poor Americans by letting them keep more of their money.

A public banking option would go a long way in safeguarding our banking system well into the future. The Post Office has done it before in the past and can do it again.

But what if that has always been part of the plan and nobody knew it?

Guess who suggested using the Post Office as a public banking option and wrote up a white paper on the subject?

According to Postal-Reporter.com:

The OIG is not making an official recommendation, though it acknowledges that a first logical step for the Postal Service may be to improve and expand on the products it can likely provide under current law. That may include payroll check cashing, electronic domestic money transfers between post offices, international money transfers, walk up bill pay, money orders, ATMs, and gift cards — though the Postal Regulatory Commission would ultimately decide whether to approve any product expansions.

Q has mentioned several times the importance of the OIG (Office of Inspector General) offices being used in the background as part of the plan.

The OIG white paper suggested ways the Post Office could expand its financial services. All of those things would create competition for private banks.

But how do you protect the American peoples savings?

The OIG suggested how.

More from the Postal-Reporter.com:

Other products, including small loans, reloadable prepaid cards, and checking or savings accounts, are likely outside the Postal Service’s current legal authority. If its authority was expanded, it could stand to gain significantly more revenue and could make a more meaningful impact on financial inclusion.

Are Postal Savings Accounts coming back?

That would make the Postal Service a “public banking option” competing with the private banking industry. That would be similar to what José “Pepe” Figueres did in Costa Rica.

Unlike private banks, the Post Office has a constitutional public service obligation for all Americans. They serve the American people and don’t just cater to the wealthy. The government should serve all of the American people, and so should our banking system. That’s why the public banking option is so important. Private banks are focused entirely on profit. Public banks focus on serving the people.

Can the Post Office become a public bank?

More from the Postal-Report.com:

Finally, the OIG examines the possibility of the Postal Service becoming a licensed bank, which would be the most time consuming, challenging, and risky approach on multiple levels. That said, this approach also could have the highest potential for benefitting the financially underserved.

Turning the Post Office into a licensed bank to compete with the private banking system would certainly be challenging.

Back when the Postal Savings System existed, the private bankers were always trying to undermine the system because they couldn’t compete for depositors in hard times. They wanted to control all the money, and by getting Congress to create Federal Deposit Insurance, it made deposits in private banks as secure as deposits at the Post Office. That purposely lessened demand for Postal savings accounts and encouraged Americans to deposit their money in private banks.

We’ve seen the result, as we’ve gone from one financial crisis to another, with the bankers just becoming wealthier as the American people have been forced to pay for every bailout.

Having a public banking option, would create a banking system that has the sole purpose of protecting the peoples savings.

But is it part of Trump’s plan?

Do you remember how Trump took control of the Federal Reserve?

I wrote about that in my article called “Master and Commander.”

Trump was able to appoint every member on the board of governors except one. That one Fed governor was a big supporter of the digital dollar, and so are Jared Kushner and Donald Trump. That’s why she wasn’t forced to resign and also why Trump has never bashed the Federal Reserve digital dollar.

It’s also part of the plan.

I wrote about that in my article, “Are CBDC’s the Path To Fear or Freedom?”

Taking over the Fed was a big part of the plan to take down the global debt system. What about the Post Office and public banking?

Did Trump take control of the Post Office the same way he did the Federal Reserve board?

Guess how many Postal governors were on the nine-member board when Trump became president?

You’ll never believe it.

According to Time Magazine:

By 2014, there were fewer than six members on the Board of Governors, which meant the body lacked a quorum and was unable to perform key functions. But while Obama nominated seven people to fill those vacancies, according to a 2018 report from the Congressional Research Service, none received a vote in the Senate.

By 2016, the Board of Governors was down to one member, James Bilbray, whose term ended in December of that year. By the time Trump took office in January 2017, the Board was officially empty, offering him a unique opportunity that he quickly seized. Of the six members currently serving on the Board of Governors, four have donated to Republican candidates, including Trump, and have served as officials in prior Republican administrations or political organizations.

The president picks the members of the Board of Governors. When Trump became president in 2017, the entire Postal Board of Governors was completely vacant.

Do you think that’s just a coincidence?

Trump got to fill the entire board. That board is the one that chooses the Postmaster General.

Trump’s board then hand-picked his choice for Postmaster General.

More from Time Magazine:

As a result of these nominations, all of which were confirmed by voice vote in the Senate, the USPS Board of Governors had a quorum and could resume its major responsibilities by August 2019. So when former Postmaster General Megan Brennan announced her intentions to retire in October of that year, the Board was in a position to elect her successor. In May, they picked DeJoy, the first person selected for that position who had not come up through the organization.

Trump’s pick for Postmaster General was Louis DeJoy, a guy who had never worked for the Post Office and was an outsider. The political left has hated DeJoy from the beginning.

According to The Washington Post:

DeJoy, the North Carolina businessman and Trump campaign donor who arrived in June to make sweeping cuts to postal operations, was appointed by a board that is now controlled five to one by loyalists to President Trump.

“We just got the board,” Trump told reporters Tuesday.

After years without a voting quorum, Trump was able to reshape the once-obscure Postal Service Board of Governors in three years into a behind-the-scenes powerhouse that is setting his priorities in motion, possibly for years to come.

The “once-obscure” Postal Service Board of Governors is setting priorities in motion “behind the scenes” for years to come.

We need to think much bigger. Trump is radically changing all the corrupt systems behind the scenes in order to safeguard our future.

Why is the Post Office so important?

More from the Washington Post:

But the president, who has fixated on one of the country’s beloved institutions since soon after taking office, has left his imprint on the Postal Service’s traditionally nonpartisan governing board, now at the center of one of the biggest controversies over election integrity in years.

“The president had a unique opportunity to start from scratch,” said Arthur Sackler, a longtime lobbyist for mailers, postal shippers and suppliers. “I can’t recall another time when there was literally no one on the board.”

Trump was fixated on changing the Post Office from the very beginning of his administration.

Why?

The Post Office is in a unique position as a government institution that has a constitutional mandate to serve the American people. I believe Trump is going to make the Post Office “great again” and use it to hand power back to the people.

It will serve the people in two ways:

1. It will help protect our elections.

2. It will help transform our banking system.

Do you remember this headline?

According to Business Insider:

The US Postal Service has filed a patent for a "reliable voting system" that would use blockchain technology to improve the security and transparency of election results, Forbes reported on Friday.

The patent proposes sending voters a unique code in the mail which they can then use to verify their identity and cast their vote online, and then storing that information on the blockchain to ensure votes aren't tampered with, according to a patent application made public last week.

Don’t miss the real reason that Trump wants this new “open ledger blockchain” technology for our election system. It’s not about mail-in votes.

It improves “security and transparency.”

It is going to verify a voter’s identity as a citizen and secure the voter rolls on a secure blockchain ledger that can’t be tampered with. Trump is going to clean up the voter rolls. That’s what I believe the blockchain patent is truly about.

I think a US-owned voter ID law is coming and the voter rolls will be cleansed.

The Post Office looks like a key player in setting up safeguards for our future elections.

What about transforming the banking system?

Guess who else has proposed a Postal Bank besides the OIG?

According to The Hill:

The recent bank crisis set off by the failure of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank has exposed a reality about how U.S. banking really works. The system’s very existence — for example, insuring deposits, loan guarantees and setting interest rates — depends entirely on the federal government.

Any debate about the future of banking in the United States should first take a page from the history of postal banking.

During its 55-year existence, beginning in 1910 by an act of Congress, the U.S. Postal Savings System became one of the largest depository institutions in the country. It served as a safe harbor during the Great Depression and provided simple and reliable basic banking services, especially in rural communities. 

Postal banking as an essential public service is an old idea whose time has come again.

The author of this editorial in The Hill is Mark Dimondstein. He is the president of the APWU (American Postal Workers Union). He makes a lot of great points, and reminds us that Postal Banking was a good safeguard for many years in this country and protected the American peoples savings accounts.

But he also introduces us to something else. It’s something that I believe will be another big safeguard for our future.

What is it?

More from The Hill:

The Federal Reserve currently serves as a bank for bankers, facilitating inter-bank payments, managing bank accounts and paying interest on those accounts. That very same service could be extended to individuals and small businesses, creating a “FedAccount” for everyone, not just the banks. There is growing interest and support for this concept.

“FedAccounts” could be a game changer in transforming the banking system.

Do you know when FedAccounts were first proposed, and by who?

According to the Berkeley Economic Review:

A potential policy recommendation was posed in 2018 by three researchers, two of whom worked in the Treasury Department. Under their proposal, the Federal Reserve would offer the option to all individuals and businesses in the United States to open a bank account, termed a “FedAccount,” with the Federal Reserve itself, providing an alternative to private banks or credit unions. Such an option could have significant effects on a wide array of monetary and economic issues.

The idea of FedAccounts were first proposed in 2018, and two of the authors worked for the Treasury. Trump was president at the time.

Do you think that’s just a coincidence? Do you think Trump doesn’t already know how these FedAccounts are going to work?

What are the possible benefits?

It would eliminate one of the cabal’s greatest tricks when it comes to the banking system.

More from Berkeley Economic Review:

Furthermore, FedAccounts would address more fundamental issues in banking. Most importantly, they would lessen, if not eliminate, the need for widespread deposit insurance, as deposits in a Federal Reserve Bank cannot be defaulted on.

A private bank’s debit card is holding the liability of the bank, and so it is backed by the ability of the bank to meet its liabilities to all its depositors.

In contrast, a debit card issued by the Federal Reserve would hold “pure sovereign money,” or the liability of the Federal Reserve itself. This difference is key in the prevention of defaults; by definition, the Federal Reserve is itself the institution that issues sovereign money, so any liability held by an account holder can always be met by just issuing more money if its depositors wish to withdraw money from their account. 

Now read all of that again, but replace the words “Federal Reserve” with the word “Treasury.”

We are going back to the constitution, and the Federal Reserve itself is unconstitutional. The Treasury is in charge of the peoples’ money, not a private bank like the Federal Reserve.

The American people will no longer need “Federal Deposit Insurance” because our accounts will hold “pure sovereign money” instead of fiat Federal Reserve Notes.

Trump is taking us back to sound money that the people own. We are going back to a gold standard that is redeemable. If you haven’t read my previous article on that subject, it’s called “The Midas Touch.”

We will no longer need Federal Deposit Insurance so we will also no longer need to bail out failed private banks.

No more tax payer bailouts. Power back to the people.

Is this part of the plan? How do FedAccounts connect with a Postal Savings Bank?

One of the people that worked at the treasury and came up with FedAccounts also wrote more on the subject.

His name is Morgan Ricks.

According to JustMoney.org:

FedAccounts might offer all the functionality of ordinary bank transaction accounts—debit cards, ATM access, direct deposit, online bill payments, online and mobile phone access, and so forth—but without any fees or minimum-balance requirements.

Moreover, the Fed could partner with the U.S. Postal Service to serve as a ubiquitous physical branch network to service these accounts. Thus, FedAccounts could be merged with postal banking proposals to create a robust public system for money and payments. The U.S. money-and-payments system would, in effect, become fully public infrastructure akin to roads, sidewalks, public libraries and the judicial system.

A fully public banking infrastructure.

A public banking option through the Post Office with no fees or minimal balance requirements, and also no credit checks. The American peoples’ money protected.

Power back to the people.

Does it sound far-fetched?

Did you know this possibility has already been proposed in Congress?

Guess who has come out against it, and is trying their best to apply pressure on Congress to reject it?

According to the American Bankers Association:

Members of Congress have proposed legislation requiring the Federal Reserve to offer government subsidized retail bank accounts in conjunction with the U.S. Postal Service (“FedAccounts”). The proposal would require banks with assets greater than $10 billion to offer basic “pass through” bank accounts with the deposits resting at the Federal Reserve and not on the bank’s balance sheet. ABA strongly supports the goal of bringing more Americans into the banking system, but this proposal is impractical, highly disruptive to the existing retail banking system, and will not lead to long-term, wealth-building financial inclusion.

Wall Street banks that have controlled our government for generations hate this proposal.

Did you catch why?

It requires the big banks to offer their customers the FedAccount public option. Their customers would have the option to place their deposits into the safe, publicly owned and controlled FedAccounts. That would remove those deposits from their balance sheets and prevent the Wall Street banks from using them in their risky schemes. It would bring the bailouts to an end.

Did you catch how they described these FedAccounts as “subsidized?”

They are desperately trying to create a narrative that these accounts are backed by taxpayers. What’s wrong with that description? The American peoples money would be safe because they own and control their own accounts and it is the private banks who have been subsidized for generations by Federal Deposit Insurance. They really fear losing FDIC protection because they know without it, the majority of the American people will choose the public option.

It will be the end of private banking control of our government.

The Wall Street banks know it, too, and that’s their greatest fear.

More from the American Bankers Association:

The U.S. has a healthy banking system with approximately 5,000 banks that employ more than 2 million people. While FDIC insured depositors have never lost a penny of an insured deposit, and no regulatory constraints. FedAccounts would therefore draw deposits from banks of all sizes to the Federal Reserve balance sheet.

First of all, does anybody believe that America has a “healthy banking system?” How many bank failures have we had recently? I’m sure there are more to come.

If we had a healthy banking system, these private banks would not need FDIC insurance. They say that nobody has lost a penny of their insured deposits, but that is a lie. Taxpayers pay for all the bank bailouts and have for generations.

Then the bankers expose their real fear:

‘Banks will nevertheless be unable to compete with a government agency offering deposit accounts with an unlimited balance sheet.’

This ends private banking control of our government.

The Wall Street banks can’t ‘compete’ with a public option that is safe and also protects “all of the American peoples savings.”

There will no longer be a $250,000.00 limit on protecting the American peoples savings. Do you know how important that is? It destroys the crooked banks that have been rewarded for risking the peoples money in corrupt schemes.

They also hate the idea that the Postal Service and their 30,000 retail offices will compete with these Wall Street banks for customers.

More from the American Bankers Association:

Finally, requiring the U.S. Postal Service to provide banking services would extend well beyond the Postal Service’s core competencies, raise a number of serious regulatory and consumer protection questions, and could leave consumers less protected than they would be at a regulated financial institution. Ultimately, FedAccounts and Postal Banking would represent a seismic shift in our national banking infrastructure.

The bankers know that this plan represents a “seismic shift in our national banking infrastructure.”

It will completely change everything and transform our corrupt banking system into one that is controlled by the people once again.

Power back to the people, with safeguards in place to protect our financial security in the future.

Game over.

All brought to you by “Don Pepe” himself.

In my articles, I have given evidence that Trump is behind these four things:

1. A move back to the gold standard.

2. The push behind the scenes for a digital dollar.

3. A Postal Banking public option.

4. The creation of FedAccounts.

Do you trust Trump?

Do you trust that he is in more control than most people realize?

Do you trust that he will create this new banking system in a way that will protect the peoples constitutional rights and protect their hard-earned money?

I’ve made my case that there is a plan and that Trump is focused on our best interests.

I believe he’s a hero and deserves our trust.

WWG1WGA

---

Badlands Media articles and features represent the opinions of the contributing authors and do not necessarily represent the views of Badlands Media itself.

---

If you enjoyed this contribution to Badlands Media, please consider checking out more of my work for free at Joe Lange’s Substack.

---

Badlands Media will always put out our content for free, but you can support us by becoming a paid subscriber to this newsletter. Help our collective of citizen journalists take back the narrative from the MSM. We are the news now.