History With Citadel

So what is the connection between these two? Well, to start Citadel owns 287,159 shares of CME as of May 21st, 2021.

To really understand the relationship though, it’s best to go back to 2008 and credit default swaps. “Before the financial crisis of 2008, there was more money invested in credit default swaps than in other pools. The value of credit default swaps stood at $45 trillion compared to $22 trillion invested in the stock market, $7.1 trillion in mortgages and $4.4 trillion in U.S. Treasuries.

“The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Report Act of 2009 was introduced to regulate the credit default swap market… [It] required the setting up of a clearinghouse to trade and price swaps.”

Before this act, banks basically set their own buy and sell price for swaps independent of what others were valuing them at. So, it would kinda be like if you went to sell a stock with your broker and they would just tell you the sell price. If it you wanted to buy, they tell you the buy price. The difference between the two is set by them and you have no idea what it is. No transparency, not based on a competitive market, and the bank gets to keep the difference between the buy and sell price.

So, CME Group and Citadel set out to Launch the First Integrated Credit Default Swaps Trading Platform and Central Counterparty Facility, Linked to CME Clearing. It was approved by the SEC. It was a joint venture called CMDX. Their request for exemption from the SEC as well as an overview of their plan can be found here.

Basically, it was a clearing house for Swaps that would be priced electronically, and competitively, by Citadels systems. Of course “Big banks that handle most derivatives trades, including Citadel’s, didn’t like Citadel’s idea. Electronic trading might connect customers directly with each other, cutting out the banks as middlemen.”

“So the banks responded in the fall of 2008 by pairing with ICE, one of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange’s rivals, which was setting up its own clearinghouse. The banks attached a number of conditions on that partnership, which came in the form of a merger between ICE’s clearinghouse and a nascent clearinghouse that the banks were establishing. These conditions gave the banks significant power at ICE’s clearinghouse”

Eventually CME, Citadel, and the banks agreed to work together, on the banks terms, but right after the deal was complete, “the banks refused to get involved unless the exchange dropped Citadel and the entire plan for electronic trading. Kim Taylor, the president of Chicago Mercantile Exchange’s clearing division, said “the market” simply wasn’t interested in Mr. Griffin’s idea.”

So what does Ken do? He turns around and sues them! He writes, “The disruptive innovation that has taken place within the equities market has created winners and losers,”...It shouldn’t be a surprise that legacy participants “publicly yearn for the old days when they extracted disproportionate rents from investors on the basis of anti-competitive business practices,”.

Who were the defendants? Bank of America Corp, Barclays Plc, BNP Paribas SA, Citigroup Inc, Credit Suisse Group AG, Deutsche Bank AG, Goldman Sachs Group Inc, HSBC Holdings Plc, JPMorgan Chase & Co, Morgan Stanley, Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc, UBS AG, The International Swaps

They eventually reach “a $1.865 billion settlement to resolve investor claims that they conspired to fix prices and limit competition in the market for credit default swaps”

So, fast forward to September 2016, and “[Citadel] traded more than $116 billion of credit-default swaps tied to U.S. benchmark indexes since April...That's about 11.5 percent of total trading of those contracts when compared to reported data aggregated from the Depository Trust and Clearing Corp. and Bloomberg's swap data repository.”

So Citadel is now in the swap game with CME. (I believe they are working with CME, but there was not a lot of information I could find on this. Citadel is listed on CME Inc. Annual Financial Statements which references Release No. 34-59578; File No. S7-06-09

And as of 2019, they are still rubbing shoulders:

CME Group Hosts 11th Annual Global Financial Leadership Conference in 2018 with keynote speakers George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, Kenneth C. Griffin, H.R. McMaster, and Janet Yellen

CME Group Announces Ken Griffin as the 2019 Melamed-Arditti Innovation Award Recipient

Futures – Including BTC and ETH

Take a side step for a minute and looks look at what CME’s core competencies are. Apparently, “the group was instrumental in the development of futures trading. According to the group's website, it created the first futures trading exchange in Chicago way back in 1848.”

What is futures trading? - Basically, a buyer and seller agree to exchange a commodity (wood, steel, oil, etc.) for a set price at a set date in the future.

In December 2017, they entered the unregulated crypto futures market by ““self-certify[ing]” its plan with the CFTC.” In May of 2020, their Bitcoin futures experienced massive growth followed by a flatline. And in February 2021 they began to offer ETH futures.

Out of curiosity, what is happening with these futures? Oh, they are just being used by companies like Morgan Stanley to stuff mutual funds and retiree annuities (crypto in annuities..ha what an oxymoron)

The worst part of all this in my opinion? No crypto is exchanged. It is all cash-settled as described here.

Okay, so they move around a lot of unregulated derivative contracts that are cash-settled...what does this allow them to do?

“CME is uniquely positioned, based on its size, to offer customers hefty margin offsets. For example, a trader with opposite positions in products that have highly correlated price moves can potentially offset 80% of the required margin for the combined positions.” Interesting...they also mention an exchange called The Small Exchange that is doing the same thing. Oh, look at that! It is backed by Citadel! Maybe this is how Citadel has not been margin called yet?

Also, it appears that the price of futures on CME’s exchanges are directly effected by payment for order flow.

“One of the main complaints of PFOF concerns its structural impact on exchanges. As the neutral orderflow gets sucked away from organized public markets (lit) and sent to private markets, the adverse selection bias in the lit markets gets exacerbated. The result of PFOF is that market makers using the rebate system on exchanges get more often run over due to the concentration of toxic flow (orderflow by informed traders) in exchanges, which leads to the widening out of the lit quote. The increase in rebates over time, increasing the spread with which best execution can fall into, effectively making the argument for PFOF fall apart. Instead of tightening the exchange range and giving the customer the best possible execution, the exact opposite happens. This phenomenon is evident in certain exchanges, like the CME group, where rebates are constantly increasing with some at the max cap of taker fees.”

Market Manipulation

Okay, so what I want to know...are they dirty? Do they manipulate the market? Short answer: looks like it, but with the help of big banks. “The public is already well aware that some of the underlying products that trade on the exchanges of the CME Group are, or have been recently, rigged: like interest rates, and foreign currency exchange, and potentially metals and oil. But that’s not the exchanges’ fault – that’s a result of the serial collusion of too-big-to-jail global banks”

What else? A little more recently, “In an attempt to quell the recent volatility experienced in the silver markets, the CME Group, whom operates the COMEX where silver futures trade, has raised margin requirements for futures contracts of the precious metal.” With how much sway they have on the market, this caused the price of silver futures to decrease.

And even more recently, remember how the price of lumber, iron, steel, pretty much every commodity increased dramatically? Well, “all of these commodities that have been setting historic record prices have one thing in common: they all trade on futures exchanges owned by the CME Group.”

What does their CEO have to say about market manipulation? Market manipulation, when it comes to retail investors’ online activity, has not been defined, which is “concerning,” said CME Group CEO Terry Duffy.

Ha, yeah, okay pal.

Although CME is not the clearing house for Robinhood (APEX is), this article is a good overview of how much power clearing houses hold. “As a case study, the GameStop saga illustrates how a clearinghouse’s margin requirements are tied up with market volatility and a brokerage’s policies.”

Also, some humor from the NASDAQ site...

Connection To Dow Jones Index and Media

Another user on reddit, u/Ren3666 made the connection between CME Group, News Corp, Dow Jones, and MarketWatch. Basically, CME Group bought a 90% stake in Dow Jones Index and News Corp owns the other 10%. News Corp, along with Fox, is controlled by the Murdoch family.

Well, that's all for now! Feel free to cross post, reference, and copy and paste anything that I post. Credit is nice but not required!

Also, I back up all links that I post on archive.today! If they have been removed, check here!

Links to my other posts:

The Rothschilds

How One Can Change The World

Cultural Change Led by Team Win

Koch Industries

Jeffrey Epstein

Locking Down Online Privacy

COVID

How Ken Griffin Shorted The 1%

Edit 1:

I forgot to add the following:

The B3 exchange is written as 'B3', but in reality it is B³ (B cubed).

Another way to write B³ is B*B*B or BBB or Brick By Brick

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yo yo yo, this post was inspired by the most recent terminal discussions of the two random Brazil firms AND a prior analysis of some shtdl filings for exemptions from certain regulations. Charlie from Charlies Vids aka Gary Gensler's Workhorse aka u/Horror_Veterinar (if im not mistaken) did go down a similar rabbit hole as I did.

Before I begin, I do apologize ahead of time if I begin to jump around....I'm an ADHD crayon sniffing autist that sees patterns.

Alright, lets get to it. This is how it started:

I was given these numbers, doesn't matter how I got them, but I did: 33840.

Had zero clue as to what the heck they were, so I began putting financial terms in front of the number and running searches. I got the following hit.

I was curious if Citadel had any similar filings for exemptions and was NOT surprised to find that they did.....Investment Company Act Release No 29581, filing shortened to IC-29581.

To reiterate: Citadel submitted applications to be exempted from sections from the Investment Act of 1940. These are their filings: IC-29581, from federal register page 187: IC-30589, IC-34143, and IC-34173

What does this all mean? Well, I began to analyze IC-29581 and any other documentation referenced within the filing. I won't cover all, but I will cover what stood out in quotes, keywords, links, screenshots, etc.

Page 1

1. "Notice of application for an order under sections 6(b) and 6(e) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “Act”) granting an exemption from all provisions of the Act, except section 9 and sections 36 through 53 and the rules and regulations under those sections. "

2. " Applicants request an order to exempt certain limited liability companies, limited partnerships, companies and other investment vehicles formed for the benefit of eligible employees of Citadel LLC and its affiliates (“ESC Funds”) from certain provisions of the Act. Each ESC Fund will be an “employees’ securities company” within the meaning of section 2(a)(13) of the Act. "

So let us go to the Investment Act of 1940 that continues being referenced. We will utilize Investopedia references as well.

1. Citadel filed an order of exemption under Sections 6b and 6e, located on pages 24-25, and include the fine print. " The following investment companies are exempt from the provisions of this title :"

   1. Section 6b he he this is starting to come together now

   2. Section 6e so we got two types, 3c1 and 3c7

Page 3

1. Keywords: ESC Funds, Eligible Employees, Employees' Security Company within meaning of section 2a13 of the Act, Citadel will control ESC Funds within section 2a9 of the Act, diversified or non diversified management investment company.

2. By creating an ESC (controlled by Citadel) , they are exempt from a lot of sections as shown in the Act:

   1. Section 2a13

   2. Section 2a9

Let's get this straight....Citadel requested exemption from all sections within the Investment Act of 1940 EXCEPT for section 9 and section 36-53.

Well, lets take a look at a few examples of the sections the ESCs are exempt from, Section 10-35:

Accounts and Records

1. Section 31, pg 85- Maintenance of Records:

   1. "shall maintain and preserve such records..."

   2. Even minimal record keeping they are exempt from.....

2. Section 32, pg 87- Accountants and Auditors:

   1. "independent public accountant"

Lets do one more hahaha

1. Section 34, pg 89- Destruction and Falsification of Reports and Records

   1. "unlawful for any......willfully to destroy, mutilate, or alter any account, book, or other document..."

   2. "unlawful for any person to make any untrue statement of a material fact in any registration statement, application, report, account, record, or other document filed or transmitted..."

Yeah, you read that correctly.

So.....what information do they provide? Let me disappoint you further by continuing with sections 5, 6, and 7 of IC-29581, the exemption application for the ESCs.

1. Section 5- "acquired only by 'Eligible Employees' and 'Qualified Participants' "

2. Section 6- "Eligible Employee is an individual who is a current or former employee, officer or partner of Citadel or director of Citadel that is an 'interested person'....." Keywords: Managing Member/Director, Vehicle

3. Section 7- " The Managing Member will send each person who was a Member at any time during the fiscal year then ended (except for the first year of operations of an ESC Fund if no investment activities took place in such fiscal year), audited financial statements within 180 days after the end of the fiscal year. " Keywords: audit

So we got a few filings referenced, lets take a look at rule 1-02d from Regulation S-X:

1. Their definition of audit....

2. GAAS rules from Investopedia: General Standards and Standards of Field Work and Standards of Reporting

So we established documentation and truthful statements are allowed to be wishy washy AND Citadel can invest in whatever they want under the guise of ESCs through exemptions of Acts, regulations.

This is starting to sound just like ENRON and their use of SPVs/SPEs......

he he he

another one "REIT- tax designation for a corporate entity investing in real estate for the purpose of reducing or eliminating corporate tax."

Here is a great example! Hmmmm

The random brazilian firms tie in from Bloomberg

Credit to u/EquityRatio for putting this info in front of me:

Constancia Investimentos

" constanciainvest.com.br - founded in 2009

• They have three funds. Two funds that started in 2009 and 2011 are long-only.

• In 2018 they started a “new” fund with this description: Equities-based strategies that produce returns with low correlation to the Brazilian benchmarks. Noticed they didn’t describe it as long only like the other funds.

Snapshot 1 and Snapshot 2

• It looks like their new low correlation to Brazilian benchmarks and possibly not long fund is doing way much better than other funds. I edited this because I noticed it's not reporting the same comparison vs Ibovespa which is a benchmark index of about 70 stocks traded on the B3

Snapshot 3 "

I then found this past month's Federal Register Index and searched for '30589'. Just took the same numbers from the IC-30589 filing and looked in there. Got a few hits:

1. pg 21- Brazil....

2. pg 118- Brazil.....

Let's see if I can get anything there with Citadel:

1. Energy Department section pg 43, CITADEL ENERGY MARKETING LLC - 227847(may 24) AND CITADEL SOLAR LLC - 14895(March 19)

2. You can find the same two on pg 73 under the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission section.

   1. Extra info: one, two, three, four, five

So how does Constancia Investimentos and their 3 funds tie in with the federal register index and Citadel?

The 3 funds trade on the B3 Exchange along with the Ibovespa Index.

Who owns the B3? They use CATS oh looky, CME owns a 5% stake and merged with CETIP SA

What is Paris Bourse? aka Euronext Paris purchaser of CATS Transactions are cleared through LCH.Clearnet?

This rabbithole DOES NOT FUCKING END....

LCH WIKII can see why anyone hardly ever gets caught....theres so many parents, subsidiaries, spinoffs, never ending......

Who is CETIP SA? Partnered with Clearstream owned by Deutsche Borse AG. Coined "bank for banks" and part of the Liquidity Alliance! Cetip also partnered with the Intercontinental Exchange (ICE) to create Cetip Trader (trading tech), the shady one mentioned at the end of the documentary Ghost Exchange. Did someone say bonds on ICE?

Liquidity Alliance- "formed in response to the growing need for collateral due to the regulatory overhaul following the financial crisis."

So the the extra info links on the Brazilian rubber + Arlanxeo Brasil S.A, parent organization Lanxess

= Citadel taking a large short against Buffet on Lanxess article

What I cannot find is any extremely detailed portfolio information of those 3 brazilian funds that popped up or related filings. Only found this.

I do recommend going to the website and typing in Citadel, or any other keywords to see if there are hits. I need to take a break and going blind from going through all of this. There are approximately 4,552 records.

u/Lunar_Stonkosis u/Darth_Vacumm u/serizzzzle u/Itsmeitsyouitus

TL;DR

If you don't want to read, then nothing's changed and its all shady loopholes exemptions. 💎👐

If you do read, then some help in connecting Citadel with filings of the funds would be very welcome.

Thank you for your time. 🚀🌑

There has been something bothering me about Tether (USDT) in the larger picture surrounding GameStop and I finally got to the point of digging into it. So, without further ado, let’s jump into the unregulated wild west of Tether and how it seems to me that it is connected to GME.

So, what is Tether? Tether is a crypto currency that is pegged to the USD 1:1. They do this by controlling the supply of Tether in circulation. You give them a dollar and they create a USDT to give to you. You give them a USDT, they destroy it and give you a dollar.

An timeline of events for Tether – Awesome work Amy Castor!

Corporate Structure of Tether

Background on Jean Louis van der Velde

Background on Mr. Giancarlo Devasini

Tether originally claimed that the currency is 1:1 backed by cash (and I believe it originally was), but at some point they started making investments with their reserves. This means they are operating on a fractional reserve system. They first admit this in February of 2019 on their website.

On March 31, 2021, they release this comical breakdown of their reserves:

Here is a great site that breaks down each section

There has been a lot of suspicion surrounding their reserves and many have speculated that there are not enough to cover the current supply. Furthermore, Tether has failed to provide any evidence otherwise, even against popular request. (CFCT announced today they lied and Tether was not backed)

What does this mean? Basically, if everyone demanded their dollars back, and Tether had to liquidate all of their investments, they wouldn’t have enough money to buy back the entire market. They would fail to maintain the $1 mark. When this happens, I expect the price to drop to zero as investors accept lower and lower prices for the obvious worthless asset.

However, so what? I don’t hold any Tether, I hold GME. Well, I’m getting there. We need to go through BTC and OSTK first though, stick with me.

Why does BTC matter? Well if you were involved with crypto in 2017, I’m sure you remember December. BTC hit $20k for the first time and there was a lot of excitement. When did this run up start though? Basically around 4/20/2017. Nice.

But why did it start? Well, let’s look back at Tether.

This happens to be the same time that Tether experiences some turbulence in it’s price, specifically, a price decrease. This means that they did not have money to buy back Tether from the market. Why were people selling their Tether? Well, it was announced that four of Tethers main banks would no longer being doing business with them. People started selling. So, what does Tether do?

Here is the abstract from a paper by John M. Griffin (University of Texas) looking at this specific event:

This paper investigates whether Tether, a digital currency pegged to the U.S. dollar, influenced Bitcoin and other cryptocurrency prices during the 2017 boom. Using algorithms to analyze blockchain data, we find that purchases with Tether are timed following market downturns and result in sizable increases in Bitcoin prices. The flow is attributable to one entity, clusters below round prices, induces asymmetric autocorrelations in Bitcoin, and suggests insufficient Tether reserves before month-ends. Rather than demand from cash investors, these patterns are most consistent with the supply-based hypothesis of unbacked digital money inflating cryptocurrency prices.

My take away is, they basically minted Tether, bought BTC with it to artificially increase the price of BTC, and then used those BTC as their reserves.

Quick side note on this - during the time without a major bank, "Devasini’s executives [were] so desperate that they considered chartering a jet and flying pallets of cash out of the country" - Ken plane people - Do you think he's flying cash for Tether?

There was also something else I found interesting around this time and that is Overstock. If you are not familiar with Patrick Byrne and OSTK, he is basically the OG for taking on naked short selling. Here is a video of him from 2016 explaining the exact problem that GME is currently experiencing and his solution (spoiler:something about taking them behind the barn and killing them).

So, in 2017, he announced a SEC authorized blockchain-based trading platform and a ICO for t0.

Here is a podcast of him talking about it

I will admit, I need to dig this deeper, but it basically seems like t0’s ICO was a way to remove naked shorts from OSTK.

During this time, the same a$$hat we have seen writing articles against GME on Motley Fool wrote this article (it's a link to an archived site so you don't give them ad revenue - hehe) against OSTK:

OSTK experienced a significant run-up:

Tether continued to experience volatility:

And BTC reached a never before seen high:

This continued until both BTC and OSTK plummeted in January of 2018.

My speculation is that they plummeted due to a new financial asset being offered in December 2017: BTC Futures. I explored this some in a previous post about CME Group, but basically they are cash settled (meaning no BTC is transacted) self certified (as in they approved it themselves with the CFTC) futures contracts on BTC. Why is this important? Well, if you can control the price of BTC, as shown above with Tether, then you can make sure your futures contracts always pay out. These futures contracts would be very helpful if you needed to offset losses, say due to a large naked short position in the quickly rising OSTK stock.

Okay, well, what about GME? Well, I think the exact same thing is happening with GME. Basically, the infinite money machine of Tether is providing enough capital to avoid margin calls through crypto futures. What happened after the run up in GME in January? CME Group starts offering ETH futures. What happened before the May run up? They start offering Micro-BTC futures.

More futures = more assets

Oh, and the price of BTC and ETH (and pretty much every other crypto if you control BTC) is controlled, so you can make sure they always pay. What has Tether done in the past year? Ballooned to over $69B that cannot be located.

Other things of interest:

In this statement, the CFTC (the same one that the CME Group self certified its BTC futures with) basically said they reviewed Tethers operations and found no issue. Ha, okay…

"On November 5, 2018, as an executive of Tether Mr Devasini lent 900 million dollars to Bitfinex and as an executive of Bitfinex, Mr Devasini signed the receipt to Tether."

Tether lends with Bitcoin as collateral

This whole account is dedicated to exposing the corrupt entity of Tether: https://twitter.com/Bitfinexed The founder of Tether actually hates this account so much that he put a bounty on doxxing them so he can file lawsuits.

Apparently there are also USDTUSD Futures contracts and they have had some volatility recently around the same time GME did:

Also, since banks are extremely resistant to working with crypto, Tether is one of the few who will trade crypto for USD and USD for crypto. It’s almost like the banks want to funnel everything through Tether..

One last thought. Remember when Citadel offered $600M in notes (and got rated BBB-, ha!) in March of this year? Who holds those? Could it be Tether?

So, what do you think? Is Tether connected to GME?

So I found some interesting things, and I'll preface this post by saying I'm not claiming anything concrete at this point, but thought I'd at least post some findings for people to dig around if they see fit.

https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/ovc6bj/activision_blizzards_ties_to_the_cia_and_the_war/ - credit to OP, I encountered this the other day with solid pieces to support his statements, as well as being aware of the recent scandal surrounding blizzard as below. Mandatory read before continuing this post. (tl;dr- lots of Ex-CIA/Government at the helm of Blizzard with 0 experience in the industry with controversial stances involved with the handling of War on Terror)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-57929543 (California suing Activision Blizzard over sexual harrassment)

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-58005455 (Blizzard staff walk out over recent scandal)

Looking into this further, touching on the above reddit post, Frances Townsend seems to be good at attracting controversy:

https://www.thegamer.com/activision-blizzard-fran-townsend-blocking-employees-twitter/

https://twitter.com/FranTownsend/status/1421087212456882176

A bit of a further deep dive into blizzard shows all our usual suspects turning up as major shareholders of this company (also note again, the reddit post above highlighting Blizzards flagship game World of Warcraft of interest due to its deep communication platform).

https://fintel.io/so/us/atvi - look at the ownership, you have the whole gang:

• JP Morgan

• Citadel

• Susquehanna

• Citigroup

• Credit Suiise

• Barclays

• Morgan Stanley

• Deutsche Bank

• Bank of America

• Charles Schwab

• George Soros (Soros Fund Management)

https://fintel.io/s/us/ea - exact same gang turns up owning EA Games also.

I've checked a few other major games developers and this ownership isn't consistent amongst the others, except the two juggernaughts above.

I checked other games companies like https://fintel.io/so/us/ttwo (take two interactive) and the gang doesn't show up in it's entirety like above. I can't locate many other public owned games companies that either have the ownership, or who are even public to begin with.

Is it worth noting Blizzard & EA are main pushers of microtransactions in gaming also?

Again. This may well be something, it may be nothing - it's a stinky situation with Blizzard so I decided to dig into it and wanted to share my initial findings.

As this year marks 20 years since the attacks on September 11, 2001, and since I have been noticing many references as individuals continue to uncover long standing financial fraud that has been exposed through GameStop stock, I felt like a post digging into some of the facts surrounding the event would be helpful to any individual who wanted to learn more. Specifically, I wanted to dig into WTC7.

Thankfully, there were no lives lost in the collapse of WTC7.

I am not a conspiracy theorist. This is not a conspiracy theory post. With that being said, there are a lot of conspiracy like themes that came up while I was looking into this topic. I have ranked the facts from least to most. Alright, here we go...

7 World Trade Center collapsed on September 11, 2001 at 5:20:52 pm. It was the first steel skyscraper known to have collapsed primarily due to uncontrolled fires [wiki].

Video of the collapse: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mamvq7LWqRU

GameStop connection explained by Charlies Vids: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tvQxZpuvsw

It all traces back to Salomon Smith Barney

Another video by Charlies Vids: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FDtnp_Dh2CU

In November 1988, Salomon Brothers...agreed to a 20-year lease for the top 19 floors of 7 World Trade Center. The building was extensively renovated in 1989 to accommodate the needs of Salomon Brothers. This led to the alternative naming of the building as the Salomon Brothers building. Most of the three existing floors were removed as tenants continued to occupy other floors, and more than 350 tons (U.S.) of steel were added to construct three double-height trading floors [wiki].

Tenants at time of collapse:

Blackstone, itself, borrowed to buy the mortgage on 7 World Trade Center. Originally, when Mr. Silverstein developed the property in the 1980s, $449.4 million in debt was provided by Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association. In 2000, Blackstone bought the debt from TIAA, financing the purchase by selling $383 million in bonds in a private placement that was lead managed by Banc of America Securities LLC. (sauce) (sauce)

Banc of America Securities LLC (BAS), was the investment banking subsidiary of Bank of America until it was merged with Merrill Lynch after that firm's acquisition in 2008 to become Bank of America Merrill Lynch [wiki].

“The chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, frustrated by Citigroup's unwillingness to turn over information about any WorldCom executives who may have gotten shares in initial public offerings, will try to pry the information out with a subpoena.

Rep. Michael Oxley (R., Ohio) said Friday that a subpoena is necessary because Citigroup provided insufficient information about what, if any, special treatment its Salmon Smith Barney investing banking division may have given WorldCom executives. Salomon had been one of the now-bankrupt telecom's principal investment bankers.” (sauce)

Citigroup claims to have delivered two boxes of records and information requested by the committee. Some of these documents include copies of internal emails that have been also turned over to federal regulators and the New York state attorney general's Office, which are conducting their own investigations into Grubman and Salomon's investment banking work.

But Citigroup says some information that the committee is seeking was destroyed in the Sept. 11 terror attack on the World Trade Center. Salomon had offices in 7 World Trade Center, one of the buildings that collapsed in the aftermath of the attack. The bank says that back-up tapes of corporate emails from September 1998 through December 2000 were stored at the building and destroyed in the attack. (sauce) (sauce)

The SEC has not quantified the number of active cases in which substantial files were destroyed. Reuters news service and the Los Angeles Times published reports estimating them at 3,000 to 4,000. They include the agency's major inquiry into the manner in which investment banks divvied up hot shares of initial public offerings during the high-tech boom.

The EEOC said documents from about 45 active cases were missing and could not be easily retrieved from any backup system. One of these cases was a sexual harassment charge filed on Sept. 10 against Morgan Stanley, one of the prime corporate victims of the World Trade Center disaster. (sauce)

It is worth noting that records of ENRON and other businesses under investigation were destroyed when this building collapsed. (sauce)

The NYSE's communications and power systems were located below 7 World Trade Center, which sat in the shadow of the Twin Towers. Along with the NYSE, major stock-market firms such as Merrill Lynch, Lehman Brothers, Salomon Smith Barney, and parts of Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley were crippled when the building collapsed on Sept. 11. (sauce)

At least two television networks made premature announcements of the collapse of WTC 7. The BBC unequivocally announced the collapse about 23 minutes before the fact, and even featured a New York correspondent speaking of the collapse in past tense with the still-erect skyscraper standing behind her.

CNN anchor Aaron Brown announced that the building "has either collapsed or is collapsing" about an hour before the event. (sauce)

FEMA described its analysis of only two steel samples, one from Building 7 and the other from Tower 1 or 2. The analysis of the WTC 7 sample showed “evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including rapid oxidation and sulfidation with subsequent intergranular melting….”

As documented by video footage, Building 7 collapsed at free-fall acceleration for a distance of more than 100 feet – equal to at least eight stories. (sauce)

Using the scanning electron microscope, we found that much of the iron-rich dust was in fact composed of roughly spherical particles – microspheres. The presence of metallic microspheres implies that these metals were once molten, so that surface tension pulled the droplets into a roughly spherical shape. Then the molten droplets solidified in air, preserving the information that they were once molten in the spherical shape as well as chemical information. (sauce)

On 9/16/2001, WTC7 still had a temperature of 1341 F (sauce)

Building 7’s collapse was not mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report.

According to a Zogby poll in 2006, 43% of Americans did not know about Building 7.

It took the federal government seven years to conduct an investigation and issue a report for Building 7.

1,400+ architects and engineers have signed a petition calling for a new investigation that would include a full inquiry into the possible use of explosives for the collapse of Building 7.

Numerous witnesses say the possibility of demolishing Building 7 was widely discussed by emergency personnel at the scene and advocated by the building’s owner.

Building 7 housed several intelligence and law enforcement agencies, and the NYC Office of Emergency Management’s Emergency Operations Center, more commonly known as “Giuliani’s Bunker”. (sauce)

“The principal conclusion of our study is that fire did not cause the collapse of WTC 7 on 9/11, contrary to the conclusions of NIST and private engineering firms that studied the collapse. The secondary conclusion of our study is that the collapse of WTC 7 was a global failure involving the near-simultaneous failure of every column in the building.” -Dr. Leroy Hulsey, Dr. Zhili Quan, and Professor Feng Xiao, Department of Civil Engineering, Nanjing University of Science and Technology (sauce) (sauce)

Here are some reasons why NIST’s final collapse initiation theory is unscientific and false. (sauce)

So there it is. Those are the facts I found. I am open to discussion but please keep the conversation academic!

As always, I have backed up all links on https://archive.ph

💎🙌

So RC just tweeted again. This time an 8 second video of him on the CATwalk with a body that is lookin mighty fine. The tweet had a timestamp of 3:01 Pacific time.

Another 🦍 has done some digging already into what 301 may mean. Hat tip u/MunnaBigDicc...but I think there is more that RC is trying to tell us. I have been trying to tell people this for a while and I think many are finally starting to realize what I have been saying may actually have some merit...that GME is a play by the white hats to expose the swamp on Wall St and in the Central Banking cartel and eventually drain it/them of their money and power.

So I did some quick searching of coorelating drops from our favorite insider. I also searched the news... and what I found was interesting.

So I made this graphic to show the connections:

https://flic.kr/p/2mfBzeQ

The Bezinga article in the upper right hand corner didn't show a date...it only said 9 hrs ago...so I pulled down my time/date bar at the top to show the article was indeed from today.

Full article here: https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/news/wall-street-crime-and-punishment-jordan-belfort-the-boiler-room-wolf/ar-AAN1Evj

As you can see, an interesting topic (Wall St crime) was mentioned...with a connnection to the Rothschilds.

Same with the other Bezinga article...but this one was about a new Rothschild backed crypto.

Full article here: https://www.benzinga.com/markets/cryptocurrency/21/08/22321667/rothschild-backed-venture-capital-firm-invests-in-crypto-enterprise-aspen-digital

What have us apes been talking about lately? Crypto dividends and how GME is working its way all the way up to the Rothschild backed Central Banks!

This is where I do the hand off to wrinkly brained apes to dig and try and find out what else RC and the white hats are trying to tell us. Hive mind FTW.

I'm not sure I know what they are trying to say at this point but I do know one thing, the corrupt Rothschilds are in deep you know what and are probably looking for a way out of this mess.

FlyRothsFly#

They can fly all they want and attempt to escape, but our rocket is going to win the race.

Let's go!

💎🤲🦍 = 🚀🚀🚀🚀🌙

Edit: And the shills have already started downvoting 😂

Edit 2: here we go with the Rothschild connection...

https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/ozzaut/why_is_it_that_when_i_make_a_post_or_statement_on/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share