Wednesday, February 19, 2014

Bloomberg News Has No Interest in Learning the Status of Gold Held by the U.S. Government

I have just returned from  "Conversation with Treasury Secretary Jack Lew," an event that was held at the World Affairs Council of San Francisco.

Jeff Taylor, the San Francisco bureau chief and editor-at-large, Bloomberg News, was the moderator. The format consisted of Taylor asking questions for 30 minutes (from 1:30 to 2:00) , followed by a 30 minute Q & A with the audience (from 2:00 to 2:30).

All questions had to be submitted in writing on cards and were moderated by Taylor. I submitted the following:
How much gold is in Fort Knox? Has the Treasury leased out any of the gold it owns?
Taylor never put the question to Lew, even though it was clear that at 2:17, Taylor had run out of other questions to ask from the cards, and there was still 13 minutes of question time. Taylor started to fumble around with his own notes to come up with more questions for Lew.

And that my friends is how you keep your job in MSM, never let any questions get through that might make a top government official uncomfortable.

I am in the middle of my packed schedule today and will report more on the Lew event tomorrow, but I just wanted to get this report on the outrageous conduct of Taylor out right away.


  1. The gold has been hypothecated, re-hypothecated, and re-re-hypothecated 'til nobody knows who might own it or what the counter party risk might be. Either that, or it's been buried either in the grave of FDR or in Richard Millstone Nixon's.

  2. The Fourth Estate has been abrogated to the blogosphere To paraphrase a recent absurd op ed on Bloomberg, Bloomberg, like the rest of the MSM, have become Fox news or worse. They are far too afraid to offend by asking tough uneasy questions and the public at large knows this.

  3. Excellent questions!!! The last thing they want to discuss is who holds the private keys to the physical gold.

    It would sure be nice if there were a global ledger for all the gold ounces and Mr. Lew could simply prove holding the private key by using it to sign a message with the private key to an entry in the ledger where the gold is allocated thus proving mathematically to the world that both the quantity and quality is possessed.

    This is just another prime example of why holding the private keys to one's wealth is so vitally important.

    In the case of gold, holding the private keys could be holding the physical gold itself where you have dominion and control. But transporting, transferring or securing it is costly both in terms of time and money. In the case of real estate, you could say that government ultimately holds the private keys since they can transfer ownership or evict at their whim thus changing who would have dominion or control.

    Whether it is withdrawing physical cash from HSBC and being refused or that Germany requested an audit of the gold it 'owns' and was refused and when they demanded physical possession they were refused again therefore it should be abundantly clear that 'ownership' and 'holding of the private keys' are not synonymous.

    And this is one reason why Bitcoin is such a technological feat because an individual can solely hold the private keys of wealth with a mere string of text.

    Can you think of any other asset or asset class where an individual can hold the private keys of wealth to millions of dollars of value? Perhaps fine art, diamonds, gold or physical cash ... but transporting or securing (and thus maintaining the security of the private keys) is extremely costly and insecure.

    Plus, using the sign message feature you can prove you hold the private key without actually moving any bitcoins around. Want to instill confidence that the lender of last resort actually has the assets it claims? Just release a signed message to mathematically prove it!

    Here is a recent interview with Ed Griffin and I were we discuss Bitcoin and I go into depth on the importance of holding the private keys of one's own wealth.

  4. That's a pretty damning scenario, Bob. Less than half the Q&A left but the moderator won't ask the question that would be newsworthy?

    Fuck these thugs.

  5. And if you DO make them uncomfortable, they'll threaten to "break you in half." Thugs.

  6. If one were to simply look up Michael Bloomberg in Wikipedia, you'd see that he owes everything to TPTB. Bloomberg News is public relations. They might be honest about who's involved (maybe), when it happened, where it happened, what happened (maybe) but don't count on the WHY. Like they say, a lie must contain major elements of truth (9/10th), but the 1/10th can send you in entirely 180 degrees in the wrong direction.