banking and finance

“If the American people ever allow private banks (Federal Reserve) to control the issue of their money, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them (around the banks), will deprive the people of their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.”

                                    Thomas Jefferson


Your Bank Is Stealing Your Money!

Did you know that: “every” bank “loan” in this country is a fraud; the banks are stealing your quality of life and future labor by concealing vital facts from you when you apply for a loan! Read the true facts below and then decide for yourself.

Fact 1: For a valid loan to exist, both parties involved must incur a risk. If one party has no risk, there is no “loan” and no equal protection for them under the law.

Fact 2: For a valid loan to exist, there cannot be an equal exchange. If you hand me $10 and I simply give $10 back to you, there is no loan. It was only an “exchange” of equal value.

Fact 3: For a valid bank loan to exist, the bank must loan you either the bank’s funds, or other depositor’s funds. Which they never do.

Fact 4: When you sign the promise to repay the loan (promissory note), the bank deposits that promissory note in an account and enters it as an asset in their ledger, just as if you had given them a check or cash. It is important that you understand this – by depositing your promissory note, the bank creates new “checkbook money”, which they then give back to you and call it a loan! It is really just an exchange.

Fact 5: After the bank deposits your promissory note, it creates new “checkbook money”, which they use to fund the so-called “loan”. The bank then demands that you pay them back the principal amount, plus interest, even though they never loaned you anything that belonged to them or their depositors. The bank never risked ANYTHING! This is fraud.

Fact 6: If you ask your bank where the money came from to fund your loan, they will tell you that it came from the bank’s funds, or other depositor’s funds. This is a lie. Ask them to show you their ledgers or give you account information to support their false claim.

Fact 7: The bank did not disclose in your loan agreement that your promissory note would be used to create the money/checkbook money used to fund your so-called “loan”.

Fact 8: The bank did not at any time incur any risk; they never loaned you the bank’s funds, or other depositor’s funds.

Fact 9: Thousands of people across America are waking up to the truth and successfully canceling their bank “debt” because of the fraud on the part of the banks.

The truly sad part is that people are being thrown out of their homes for no other reason than they agreed to it in writing at the beginning of the banking process. They didn’t know that they were agreeing to be foreclosed, that is part of the dirty deception of the banksters. The banks have conveniently structured the loan documents to bypass the law so that they can trick borrowers into giving up their rights to the property for not paying the loan servicing fee to the servicing agent, which the borrowers should not have to pay at all.

Most people do not fully understand what banking and finance contracts they are signing and they don’t even completely read what they sign. You must develop a deep suspicion as to why these documents you are asked to sign at closing are 18+ pages long. It is because the banks know that the forms are long and full of legal phrases and the victims who are signing the contracts are too impatient to fully read them. Even when the banksters send a copy of the contract to the borrowers before the signing, most people still won’t read and understand it. PLEASE READ THESE BINDING CONTRACTS FROM THE BANK FOR YOUR OWN PROTECTION. If you don’t understand something either look it up on this website or send us an email. Don’t bother asking your lender, they are the people trying to scam you).

If you have already signed these contracts, there are still remedies and actions you can do to correct the problem. An act of banking and finance fraud has no statute of limitations attached to it so you can always do something to modify or nullify it, even years later. If anything was not disclosed to you about the loan or transaction it could be a deliberate act of fraud by the bank.  Re-read facts 1 – 9 above.

The loan contract that you signed was only signed (created) by you and under the law only you can modify the terms of that contract. If you feel you were cheated and tricked into signing something then you have the absolute right to change that document. After all, you were the only one who created the contract and signed it. Remember when the bank sent you notification that they alone are changing the terms of your checking, credit card or savings account agreement (contracts). They were the only party that created those terms in the account agreements.  When you do make changes to the loan contract, the beneficiary, the trustee and the power of attorney, you must notify the other parties concerned. It is preferable to use a private courier service like FED-X, DHL or UPS with a return proof of delivery signed receipt to deliver this notification of modifications.

The only party who has the legal capacity to actually foreclose on a Single Family Residence is the “Secretary of H.U.D.” The H.U.D Secretary will appoint a separate commissioner to handle the foreclosure. This is true unless you gave the banksters permission or authority to appoint their own foreclosure personnel by contract in the 18+ page promissory note documents that you signed. The Secretary of H.U.D. oversees all government regulated loans. If your banking and finance loan package (more than likely) had a H.U.D. disclosure statement in it, then it still qualifies as being a loan the government has an interest in. So it might still be determined in court that only the Secretary of H.U.D. and not the lender, has the authority to foreclose on your property.

What all this means is that the majority, if not all, of the Single Family Resident loans are of a fraudulent nature and the banking community is deliberately trying to keep you economically enslaved for the next 10, 20, 30 years under your loan contract documents.

If you deposit $100 into your checking/savings account and return a month later to withdraw the funds. Would you let the bank return the $100 to you as a loan and charge interest, or would you demand that they give you back the funds you deposited? Nobody in their right mind would allow the bank to loan them their money back! Yet the bank hides these vital facts every time they issue a “loan”, by stealing and depositing your promissory note, and then loaning it back to you with interest!

What happens is that because 97% of the nation’s money supply consists of CREDIT (debt), which is all created by private corporation lender institutions and because interest is charged on every dollar of credit used, debts are constantly created for which no money really exists with which to repay those debts.

By what authority and under what laws are such banking and financial institutional lenders given the right to create credit as lawful money or to demand lawful money, legal tender, in return for only credit loaned? There is no such law or authority. Almost every loan and payment obligation in the United States can legally be voided because it is based on fictional credit instead of real money.

 A national bank has no power to lend its credit to any person or corporation . . .”          Bowen v. Needles Nat. Bank, 94 F 925 36 CCA 553, certiorari denied in 20 S.Ct  1024, 176 US 682, 44 LED 637.

However, if you have received a fair consideration of goods or services in exchange for your promise to repay the lender or creditor or merchant, you will be held liable for repayment.

But, where you have given your lender a deed to your real property in exchange for his mere bookkeeping entry of a fictitious credit to your checking account, you may have a legally voidable contract. Even if he has given you a Certified Check, a Cashier’s Check, or Bank Check, such checks are mere promises to pay. If you do not walk out of that lender’s bank with cash in gold or silver in your hand, it could well be that he does not have the cash in his vault to back up his check. If such is the case, the check is a worthless  Not Sufficient Funds (NSF) check, and the bankster’s actions can best be described as unlawful.

Actually, our money system today can really be described as a debt usury system. For every dollars worth of credit that comes into existence, a debt is created for which the lender charges interest. It can be said that every bank loan made in the United States today is illegal, since all bank loans are based on credit instead of money.

You probably went down to a bank, and initiated an EQUITY relationship and contracted with that corporation and unknowingly also with the federal government. When you opened a savings or checking account, credit card or received a loan you had to sign a “signature card” and this formed your contract with the federal government.  Your signature on any bank document forms the binding contract between you and the U.S.  government, which makes you subject to all U.S. federal law such as Social Security and the I-R-S taxes. 

Commercial contracts in effect with banks or other financial corporations are invisible juristic contracts in effect with the Federal U.S. Government. The banks are in a special status with the U.S. Government, and likewise so are the individual people who have accounts and experience profit and gain from any commercial contract they enter into with a bank. 

This relational effect of doing business in U.S. Government’s commerce is pronounced quite clearly in the Instrumentality Doctrine – the Supreme Court initiated publicly with  Davis vs. Elmira Savings, 161 U.S. 275, at 283 (1896):

“National banks are instrumentalities of the Federal
Government, created for a public purpose, and as such
necessarily subject to the paramount authority of the United

This Instrumentality Doctrine is very significant, and the word Instrumentality means an Equity Relationship that is quite strong in American Jurisprudence. As nationally chartered banks are the Instrumentality of the Congress, consider the subordinate party (the banks) as being the “right hand” of the master (the Congress). This is a very powerful doctrine indeed, and you need to understand exactly what it really means.

From a judicial perspective, any profit or gain experienced from a using a bank carries with it the same identical full force and effect as if the U.S. government created the gain. Consider, for a moment, the application of the Instrumentality Rule to corporations:

“Under this Rule, corporate existence will be disregarded
where a corporate subsidiary is so organized and controlled
and its affairs so conducted as to make it only an adjunct
and instrumentality of another parent corporation.”

Now, think what happens when the U.S. government is the parent corporation, and your local banking and finance is the subsidiary corporation. Under the Instrumentality Doctrine, the local bank as a person and a legal entity fades away in significance as if it was transparent, and the U.S. Government and the Secretary of the Treasury then appear as the real contracting persons you are entering into commercial agreements with.

Are you beginning to see the legal significance of this Instrumentality Doctrine? Are you beginning to appreciate the deeper meanings of your bank account in that it is the U.S. Government that you are really contracting into commerce with, and the bank is just the U.S. Government’s local agent?

That bank you are using is literally the private personal property of the U.S. Government. The Commerce Clause refers to Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution, which gives Congress the power “to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes. Congress uses the Commerce Clause to justify exercising legislative power over the activities of the states and their citizens (you), regarding the balance of power between the federal government and the states. The Commerce Clause has historically been viewed by the courts as both a grant of congressional authority over all of the people and their commercial transactions and as a restriction on the authority of the states to regulate federal law.

Entrepreneurs who go out start and capitalize a new bank from scratch do not own that bank. The bank is owned by the U.S. Government who created the new bank’s corporation, and the Comptroller of the Currency later issues out a banking charter. The individual shareholders really only hold an equitable interest in the bank’s operations.

This banking Instrumentality Doctrine is a pretty strong relational status for the judiciary to take cognizance of, so when we probe back down the line to uncover why chartered banks are in such a status, we should not be too surprised to uncover our old friend: A contract.

Originally applicable only to nationally chartered banks, the Instrumentality Doctrine has since been expanded under the enlarging regulatory penumbra of the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 to include all state and federally chartered member banks of the Fed.

During the Depression, banks who became members of the FDIC and FSLIC insurance programs were deemed Instrumentalities, and this doctrine is now applied in the United States to include all financial institutions where there is any Federal regulatory interest in them. This now includes all credit cards, debit cards, stock brokerage houses, credit unions, insurance companies, and pension funds. 

For example, people acquiring a Merrill Lynch Cash Management Account, which is a negotiable withdrawal instrument, are in the same juristic personality status (in federal commerce) with a Merrill Lynch checking account, as they are with a checking account from any of the conventional depository banking and finance institutions,  such as the Manufacturer’s Hanover. When a person initiates such a bank account relationship with the federal government, an examination of Fourth Amendment search and seizure cases relating to account records that banks send to depositors reveals that the Federal appellate judiciary considers the Fourth Amendment to be non-applicable to a seized bank account.

12 U.S. Code § 3403.Confidentiality of financial records

(a)Release of records by financial institutions prohibited
No financial institution, or officer, employees, or agent of a financial institution, may provide to any Government authority access to or copies of, or the information contained in, the financial records of any customer except in accordance with the provisions of this chapter.

(b)Release of records upon certification of compliance with chapter
A financial institution shall not release the financial records of a customer until the Government authority seeking such records certifies in writing to the financial institution that it has complied with the applicable provisions of this chapter.

(c)Notification to Government authority of existence of relevant information in records

Nothing in this chapter shall preclude any banking and financial institution, or any officer, employee, or agent of a financial institution, from notifying a Government authority that such institution, or officer, employee, or agent has information which may be relevant to a possible violation of any statute or regulation. Such information may include only the name or other identifying information concerning any individual, corporation, or account involved in and the nature of any suspected illegal activity. Such information may be disclosed notwithstanding any constitution, law, or regulation of any State or political subdivision thereof to the contrary. Any financial institution, or officer, employee, or agent thereof, making a disclosure of information pursuant to this subsection, shall not be liable to the customer under any law or regulation of the United States or any constitution, law, or regulation of any State or political subdivision thereof, for such disclosure or for any failure to notify the customer of such disclosure.

(d)Release of records as incident to perfection of security interest, proving a claim in bankruptcy, collecting a debt, or processing an application with regard to a Government loan, loan guarantee, etc.

(1)Nothing in this chapter shall preclude a financial institution, as an incident to perfecting a security interest, proving a claim in bankruptcy, or otherwise collecting on a debt owing either to the financial institution itself or in its role as a fiduciary, from providing copies of any financial record to any court or Government authority.

(2)Nothing in this chapter shall preclude a financial institution, as an incident to processing an application for assistance to a customer in the form of a Government loan, loan guaranty, or loan insurance agreement, or as an incident to processing a default on, or administering, a Government guaranteed or insured loan, from initiating contact with an appropriate Government authority for the purpose of providing any financial record necessary to permit such authority to carry out its responsibilities under a loan, loan guaranty, or loan insurance agreement.

(Pub. L. 95–630, title XI, § 1103, Nov. 10, 1978, 92 Stat. 3698; Pub. L. 99–570, title I, § 1353(a), Oct. 27, 1986, 100 Stat. 3207–21; Pub. L. 100–690, title VI, § 6186(a), Nov. 18, 1988, 102 Stat. 4357.)

Double click on video for full screen - from 2/4/2021

Since the “zone of privacy” inherent in the Papers Clause of the Fourth Amendment does not protect information you have deposited into the hands of third parties, like banking and finance institutions, Federal Courts find it unnecessary to probe any deeper and explicitly tell you the real underlying reason why bank accounts fall outside the protective penumbra of the Fourth Amendment; is because a commercial contract is in effect, and the Bill of Rights cannot be held to interfere with or obstruct the contemporary execution of commercial contracts, for either party (and properly so).

But wait, as those Supreme Court cases dealt with bank accounts seized from a bank itself, and banks as regulated commercial establishments have no Fourth Amendment rights whatever. So there are no privacy rights in any information you create or deposit when using those banks, and this remains true whether or not there was a commercial contract in effect or not. Hmmm.

But what if those banking and finance account records were seized from your home where the Fourth Amendment does apply? Now what? The Fourth Amendment still does not apply, and properly so, because those records are the bank’s federal property.


All of the above facts are implemented in all banks that are in the Federal Reserve System. For details read more in their own publication, MODERN MONEY MECHANICS.

What an EXCHANGE !!


Best Guru Info will share information with you on how to avoid banking fraud and tell you what you need to know about stopping the banksters.  Don’t let the bastards grind you down.  Contact us by Email.  Click here to go to our CONTACT FORM.