U.S. Intelligence Suspected of Killing CFTC Silver Manipulation Case Against JP Morgan

By Dominique de Kevelioc de Bailleul

“Four-year silver probe set to be dropped,” FT titles its piece Monday regarding the JP Morgan silver manipulation scandal.

According to FT:

A four-year investigation into the possible manipulation of the the silver market looks increasingly likely to be dropped after US regulators failed to find enough evidence to support a legal case, according to three people familiar with the situation. . .

In 2010, Bart Chilton, a CFTC commissioner, said that he believed there had been “fraudulent efforts” to “deviously control” the silver price.

But after taking advice from two external consultancies, the first of which found irregularities on certain trading dates that it believed deserved more analysis, CFTC staff do not have sufficient evidence to bring a case, according to the people familiar with the situation.

Though Ted Butler, GATA and Andrew Maguire have provided the ‘watchdog’ agency with a drivers licenses of the suspects, a video tape of the incidents, the address of the assailants and the usual time they sit down for dinner, two mysterious “external consultants” believe that the “CFTC staff do not have sufficient evidence to bring a case.”

Therefore, the refusal of the CFTC to hand over the ‘smoking gun’ evidence to the U.S. Department of Justice in the JP Morgan case is no longer the issue for silver bugs to seek relief; the issue now becomes: Why won’t charges ever be filed against Jamie Dimon?

On May 5, 2006, then-President George W. Bush essentially handed over Wall Street, COMEX and CME to the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), a spy agency created in Dec. 17, 2004.  In essence, with the signing of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004, anything that truly matters in the financial markets ultimately has no democratic oversight to protect market participants.

From the Business Week article of May 2006 (no longer available online):

Intelligence Czar Can Waive SEC Rules

Now, the White House’s top spymaster can cite national security to exempt businesses from reporting requirements.

President George W. Bush has bestowed on his intelligence czar, John Negroponte, broad authority, in the name of national security, to excuse publicly traded companies from their usual accounting and securities-disclosure obligations. Notice of the development came in a brief entry in the Federal Register, dated May 5, 2006, that was opaque to the untrained eye.

AUTHORITY GRANTED. William McLucas, the Securities & Exchange Commission’s former enforcement chief, suggested that the ability to conceal financial information in the name of national security could lead some companies “to play fast and loose with their numbers.” McLucas, a partner at the law firm Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr in Washington, added: “It could be that you have a bunch of books and records out there that no one knows about.”

The memo Bush signed on May 5, which was published seven days later in the Federal Register, had the unrevealing title “Assignment of Function Relating to Granting of Authority for Issuance of Certain Directives: Memorandum for the Director of National Intelligence.” In the document, Bush addressed Negroponte, saying: “I hereby assign to you the function of the President under section 13(b)(3)(A) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.”

A trip to the statute books showed that the amended version of the 1934 act states that “with respect to matters concerning the national security of the United States,” the President or the head of an Executive Branch agency may exempt companies from certain critical legal obligations. These obligations include keeping accurate “books, records, and accounts” and maintaining “a system of internal accounting controls sufficient” to ensure the propriety of financial transactions and the preparation of financial statements in compliance with “generally accepted accounting principles.”

Knowing how the National Security Agency (NSA) has worked in the past, it, also, should not be too surprising that the ‘smoking gun’ witness to JP Morgan’s blatant manipulation of the silver market, Andrew Maguire (and his wife), was attacked by a hit man in a hit-and-run car assault the day following his damaging testimony against JP Morgan at a CFTC hearing of Mar. 25, 2010.

Here’s where the DNI may have stepped in to squash the CFTC investigation into JP Morgan and, possibly, took action to permanently squash Andrew Maguire, too.

At the time of the attack on Maguire, the highly-controversial Admiral Dennis C. Blair was on duty as director of national intelligence (Jan. 29, 2009 – May 28, 2010).

The U.S. economic collapse “already looms as the most serious one in decades, if not in centuries,” Blair told the Senate Intelligence Committee on Feb. 12, 2009.

“Time is probably our greatest threat,” Blair added. “The longer it takes for the recovery to begin, the greater the likelihood of serious damage to U.S. strategic interests.”

Nearly a year later, Feb. 3, 2010, Blair testified again before Congress, and said, “If that direct action–we think that direct action will involve killing an American, we get specific permission to do that. … I would rather go into details in closed session, Mr. Chairman, but we don’t target people for free speech. We target them for taking action that threatens Americans or has resulted in it.”

Blair added, “Being a U.S. citizen will not spare an American from getting assassinated by military or intelligence operatives overseas if the individual is working with terrorists and planning to attack fellow Americans.”

Those two ‘external consultants’ who ‘advised’ the CFTC to drop the case against JP Morgan may have come from the DNI, citing national security interests, of course.

And as far as Andrew Maguire, it may have been a pure coincidence that the director of national intelligence at the time of his hearing with the CFTC was a loose cannon, Blair, a possible psychopath.  Was the DNI behind the hit-and-run of Andrew Maguire and his wife?

For more information on Blair’s checkered past, including disobeying direct orders, suspicions of perjury and other dishonorable accusations, read about him on Wiki.

Gold market: Pan-Asia Gold Exchange IS a Game-changer

Andrew Maguire’s assertion that China’s Pan-Asia Gold Exchange will wrest power away from the JP Morgan bullion market suppression scheme is already under attack.

Maguire, the so-called “whistleblower” who alerted U.S. authorities of JP Morgan’s  bullion market price manipulation scheme and went public in March 2010 with his complaint, told King World News he expects the illegal naked shorts in the gold and silver market will be destroyed and that a true price discovery environment will result of China’s 1.3 billion population becoming empowered to buy the precious metals.

The primary argument against Maguire’s analysis is that markets don’t move price with the addition of the Pan-Asia gold Exchange.

It’s true, markets don’t move price – participants do.  But the point Maguire makes has everything to do with the participants having access to the marketplace—hundreds of millions of anxious Chinese, who have so far driven up the price of everything that doesn’t have a dead president stamped it, such as copper, oil, lumber, food and every other commodity.

For 50+ years, starting with Mao Tse Tung, the Chinese were precluded from owning gold.  In 2005, that all changed.  Beijing understands the importance of the gold market in its efforts to establish the RMB as major reserve currency and the privileges that come with that status.

In the first quarter of 2011, Chinese investors bought 93.5 tons of gold coins and bars.  After considering that China’s gold production reached only 340 tons of gold last year, with a consumption rate of 700 tons along with investor demand expected to top 20% per year, the expanded access through the Pan-Asia Gold Exchange to an expanded market will supercharge the public’s participation in the gold market.

Through the Pan-Asia gold Exchange distribution network and introduction of innovative gold products for the Chinese masses—a quite different model from the Shanghai Gold Exchange—the ease of access to market for the most populated country of the globe is Maguire’s point.

Consider the effect on the gold price of 320 million retail customers and 27 million corporate customers who conduct business through a network of 24,000 branches, and who now are able to buy gold through the Internet with a click of a mouse.  That’s the network established between the Pan-Asian Exchange and The Agricultural Bank of China.   Minimum contracts of only 10 ounces may be purchased, as opposed to the 100-ounce minimum required in Shanghai and Hong Kong.

And the Pan-Asian Gold Exchange goes live this month!

During the CFTC hearings earlier this year, Jeffrey Christian of the CPM Group said he estimates that the London Bullion Management Association (LBMA) has on deposit $153,000 worth of claims for each ounce of physical gold—which calculates to approximately 100 to 1 leverage to actual gold available for delivery.

What if there’s a sudden demand for physical gold, say, from China?  Who will deliver it?

Maguire’s conclusion that the shorts operating under protection of the CME should be frightened is entirely appropriate.

How China Intends to take Down the Comex

Andrew Maguire, the man who in Nov. 2009 told U.S. authorities of a silver manipulation scheme in progress led by the Fed through its primary dealers JP Morgan and HSBC, said China’s new Pan Asia Gold Exchange will overwhelm the manipulators in the gold and silver market and create a historic short squeeze in those markets.

In an interview with King World News, Maguire said he believes the rapid rise of China’s middle class will force the pricing mechanism in the precious metals markets to shift to the PAGE, and away from the Comex, where the manipulation continues.

“The launch of this new gold and silver exchange has flown under the radar, but certainly has my attention,” said Maguire.  “I firmly believe we are marking a pivotal point that will in very short order affect current precious metals price discovery dynamics.”

And those dynamics “will ultimately destroy the remaining short positions in both gold and silver,” leaving the scheme exposed to the world as another example of a broken, desperate and corrupt U.S.-led global financial system.  China poses as the largest threat to dollar hegemony, which now includes the Achilles heal of that privilege—the bullion market.

For decades, the Comex and its cohorts at the LBMA have controlled the precious metals market, and was a regret of former Fed chairman Paul Volker that he didn’t control the gold price more during his inflation battle during the 1979-82 period of runaway consumer prices.

But that control is about to collapse, said Maguire.  He expects the 1.3 billion Chinese, who, until 2009 have been banned from owning gold and silver in the People’s Republic of China, will overwhelm the global bullion market now that the Chinese people can buy gold as easily through their local bank.

Because of the difficulty of unloading $2 trillion of debt assets in time before a dollar collapse, Beijing has decided to take a page out of Mao’s playbook instead.

“China is keen to diversify their cash holdings and is also encouraging citizens to make investments in gold and silver,” Maguire continued.  “The Pan Asia Gold Exchange is another step in this direction by opening up ease of access to physical gold and silver to their bank customers. This physical backed exchange is going to be a big game-changer.

“Just look at the scale of this to get an idea of how massive this game-changer will be.  The Agricultural Bank of China has over 320 million retail customers and 2.7 million corporate customers and has integrated its customer account information system with this platform.”

Maguire suspects that bullion analysts have not factored in the China effect slated to hit the market in the coming years, a variable that could push the Comex to  resort to cash settlement in a similar manner to the London Gold Pool in March of 1968, when it collapsed.

“I believe the leveraged and naked existing short side concentration in silver will be blind-sided by this,” added Magurie.  “In my opinion it will create a massive short squeeze.

“None of this potential new physical demand has been factored in by analysts and I expect a large and unanticipated draw down of physical gold and silver over the next few months, ahead of the international contracts going ‘live.’”