Bankster Cahooting Evidence
I’m going to do some sleuthing here to bring forth an irrefutable case of Banksterism that cannot be ignored, especially for anyone who values fortifying and growing their wealth as Main Street investors. By now, it should come as no surprise that I advocate for the financial well-being of the “little guys” and do what I can do expose the ridiculously slanted playing field to you so you can know what you’re up against.
As such, I am going to dig deeper today into the recent Reddit versus Wall Street battle over such stocks as GameStop, Blackberry and AMC Entertainment. While I’m sure there’s still astronomical information buried deep into this story, let’s dig just a foot or two into the surface for today.
Of late, retail investors and traders, such as those assembled on the Reddit front, have been empowered in their financial endeavors by platforms, such as Robinhood, which do not charge retail customers any trading commission. At a cost of zero, it would appear the investment and trading landscape is becoming that much more accessible to the “average household”.
And let’s not forget that in so naming their platform “Robin Hood”, they may have ingeniously taken on a brand that’s easily identifiable with the notion of “taking from the rich and giving to the poor”. All the more reason for the average trader to feel he finally has a shot in the big leagues.
But how can a platform like Robinhood run a business with zero revenue? Is it a not-for-profit venture? Hardly.
Dig another foot deeper. What do you find?
There are the usual revenue generators for a FinTech such as Robinhood. They have their fee-for-service subscription, which is open to anyone who wants to add levels of service over and above that which is provided at the free level.
Robinhood also allows clients to invest on margin so Robinhood is able to earn interest from the funds lent out to investors. According to some quick research, they presently charge 5% annually on any amount borrowed over $1,000.
They also invest some of their own cash on hand, giving them access to investment income. There’s also interchange fees, which they earn from the MasterCard debit card they offer to investors, who can access their funds through the card.
But here’s the big one. Another segment of their revenue is from “Payment from Order Flow”. When orders are placed on platforms such as Robinhood, they’re sent to market makers who process the orders and then pay the platform a small fee. In essence, it’s a sort of referral fee, if you will. A “thank you for sending trading business our way” payment. In Robinhood’s case, some of the market makers they send deals to are Citadel and Two Sigma. (1)
And this is where things get interesting.
One of the hedge funds decimated by the GameStop short squeeze was Melvin Capital Management. Do you want to venture a guess who bailed Melvin out? Some of you may already know because this isn’t information that’s difficult to find. Yet I bring it forth here as I continue to amass information and proof that Banksters don’t care about you. If nothing else, this will all become a historical repository of the piling up proof.
Anyways, Melvin was bailed out by Citadel, to a tune of $2 billion. (2)
Yes, that’s right. That’s the same Citadel that pays Robinhood to bring trading deals to them, Citadel. That put Citadel, whether by design or not, right square in the middle between the two warring factions.
Interesting, to say the least. But think about it. In very simple terms, Citadel now has to make a decision. Let the Reddit crowd continue crushing hedge funds, one of which Citadel dumped a couple of billion dollars into. Or quash the Main Street Reddit crusade to protect their investment.
Don’t forget Citadel pays Robinhood to flow those same GameStop trades through Citadel. Sure, there’s the very valid argument that Citadel was willing to pay the flow fees because they were harvesting infinitely more valuable information, information they turned around and profited from with their own high frequency trading algorithms. Let’s not fool ourselves. Banksters never pay for nothing.
But there comes a point where a $2 billion investment is more valuable than the worth of that information. And call it a bailout if you want but it was an investment because again, Banksters don’t just throw out that sum of money for nothing.
And so, while Robinhood may insist that their restrictions and clampdown on trades of stocks such as GameStop was motivated only thanks to escalating regulatory capital requirements, it’s difficult not to imagine that a high level "Citadelian" picked up the phone and called "Robin of Locksley or Little John" and strongly suggested the quashing of any further buy orders on those stocks. I’m sure Citadel offered to continue to keep flowing the trades but informed Robinhood that no further deal flow fees would be paid. In such a case, Robinhood was left with little choice.
But this fantastic story doesn’t end there. No, no, no. Of course, it must get more convoluted to confuse and discourage more and more people from digging too deep.
Naturally, Redditers were not happy with this development, regardless of the true reasoning behind Robinhood’s antics. There was blood in the water. Robinhood could’ve easily pointed at Citadel and directed the blame to Citadel. But they quickly realized the corner they had backed themselves into was getting tighter and tighter.
Enter Ben Bernanke. Remember him? Helicopter Ben. Chairman of the US Federal Reserve, more affectionately named The Fed, from 2006 to 2014. Yeah, him. I’m sure it’s a complete coincidence that’s he’s a Senior Advisor at Citadel. Nothing to see here, right? (3)
Then you won’t mind me saying it’s a tad curious that his successor as Fed Chair, Janet Yellen, is now the Secretary of Treasury of the United States. The same Treasury Department which, by its own hand, proclaims as its role: (4)
“…to maintain a strong economy and create economic and job opportunities by promoting the conditions that enable economic growth and stability at home and abroad, strengthen national security by combating threats and protecting the integrity of the financial system, and manage the U.S. Government’s finances and resources effectively.”
Oh, and let’s not forget, as evidence in a my recent "Bankster Menace Returns" piece, in 2020 alone, Citadel paid the future Secretary of Treasury nearly $1M in speaking fees for appearances she made on a number of their online events.
Yet again, I’m sure this is pure coincidence. Right?
Full circle now back to Robinhood, who quickly realized that the "Citadelian" on the phone threatening to cut off order flow fees also had Ms. Yellen on the other line. Is it a stretch to think Citadel might be calling in a favor with the beneficiary of nearly $1M in speaking fees? Perhaps Citadel was gently requesting Ms. Yellen “protect the integrity of the financial system”? And maybe Citadel’s own Senior Advisor Ben has also uncovered some interesting information about Robinhood which his friend at the Treasury might find of interest. True or not, the mere word of an investigation could be devastating to a FinTech hoping to cash in with an IPO later in the year.
Naturally, Ms. Yellen is expected to officially and loudly proclaim her disdain for what happened to the “little guy” Reddit investors, all the while making the problem disappear into the Bankster rabbit hole.
To paraphrase the character Willy Banks from Ocean’s 13 with a comment I made in a previous episode, Banksters doesn’t lose. People who bet against Banksters lose, and they lose big. But Banksters doesn’t lose.
Of course, this isn’t to say that I think this is right. I have a strong belief there will come a day when Banksters are dealt a devastating financial blow and I look forward to being on the front lines of that deliverance.
Now, you might be feeling lost in all that barrage of piling evidence. Don’t worry. As relatively simple as these arguments and facts actually are, they still are confusing to most people. By my estimation, this is purposely done by the Bankster class as a means to discourage us petty peons from trying to understand the shadiness involved and instead, to just shake our heads, waive our hand and move along with our lives.
But we know differently, don’t we?
The first course of action is to continue building our understanding of the truths in money, markets and investments. We cannot take what we’re fed by most of the media as 100% fact. There are forces at play we likely can’t yet fathom. But it’s also why you listen to this podcast, to get your dose of outrageous money, markets and investment news so you can be more in the know and see through the piles of BS. And for that reason, you should be sharing this blog with others.
Next, we must take more of our financial future into our own hands. That’s not to say we must become learned in every aspect of money, markets and investments. Instead, we need to more carefully vet the professionals we entrust with helping us secure and empower our wealth.
And take note and scrutinize with a grain of salt what even billionaire “do-gooders” are putting out there. For example, according to Barron’s, billionaire Mark Cuban, of Dallas Mavericks and Shark Tank fame, “…wrote that Robinhood ‘let you down in a big way’ and he suggested that traders find a ‘broker with TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS in asset on their balance sheet.” (5)
Sure, Mark. In other words, the very same firms involved in the highest echelons of Bankstersville who care only about their bloated financial pockets? Yeah, that’ll do a whole bunch of good. Sorry Mark, but with that sort of attitude, I wonder why he invests in any companies that enter the Shark Tank. Not one of those has trillions of dollars of assets and yet, there’s Mr. Mark, doling out money to companies he expects to be the “next big thing”. But again, let’s not fool ourselves. In selecting a broker or advisor or any other financial professional or institution, we too are investing our money and future.
Lastly, don’t be afraid to do some of your own research. Yes, what you find might be uncomfortable but if your family’s wealth is of any concern to you, this is a case where ignorance is most definitely not bliss.
But then again, these are mere rantings and ravings of a Recovering Bankster. What do I know.
(1) Product Mint