SideNote: Take advantage of this current beatdown of PMs to keep stacking. Helicopter money is on its way. Window dressing for the Nov. Prez election and the final nail in the coffin of world currencies. GRIM

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

While on a speaking tour overseas, an official of the Federal Reserve has confirmed the “next step” in the Fed’s plan to consolidate complete control over the economy of the United States.

During an interview on Australia’s ABC AM, Loretta Mester of the Cleveland Federal Reserve said that the Fed is “assessing tools” that could be used to increase the influence of the central bank on the flow of money in the United States.The report of Mester’s appearance on the Australian news program indicates that helicopter money is not only being planned for distribution in the United States, but throughout the world, as central banks coordinate their coup d’etat.

“The comments come as major central banks — including the US Federal Reserve, the European Central Bank and the Bank of Japan — consider unconventional policy tools in a world of slowing growth, low inflation and record low interest rates,” the Australian news channel writes.

Remarkably, during the interview, Mester not only reinforced the Fed’s role as money printer, interest rate setter, and global economic policy maker, but she added the authority to control employment, as well. “I do think we've made significant progress on the employment part of our mandate and the recent inflation data has been encouraging," Mester said.

Since when does the Federal Reserve have a “mandate” to control employment? Since the American people allowed the central bankers to establish an outpost in this country.

Undoubtedly this “money” will be used within the 50 states to pay debts and will be required to be accepted as “legal tender for all debts public and private.” But what does the Constitution say?

Article I, Section 10 reads: “No state shall ... make any thing but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts.”

Could state lawmakers and governors not rise up, assert their sovereignty, and base their absolute refusal to fence the Fed’s fake money on the proscription against such policies set out in Article I, Section 10?

Yes, they could. Yes, they should.

The question remains: Will states serve as the barricades between tyrants and the people as the Founders intended, or will they continue serving no greater purpose than to be the administrative subordinates of the potentates on the Potomac?