Proof That the U.S. Financial System is a Criminal Enterprise Operation

Proof That the U.S. Financial System is a Criminal Enterprise Operation

Posted on July 20, 2014 by Dave Hodges

What was revealed in the previous article should shake the confidence that the public has in the DEA and the federal government as a whole. My DEA insider has revealed that there is massive, unchecked banking fraud and money laundering occurring within our financial institutions. Our banks are run like a Mafia protection racket. If you doubt the accuracy of this statement, ask yourself why we are witnessing a massive kill off of banking officials from the nation’s largest banks? The answer is simple. Dead men tell no tales.
The following is not entertainment reading. This is a systematic report which details certain DEA operations and it is the story of how justice is muted when it comes to drug trafficking. There is complicity in these illegal enterprises from official government and corporate entities, particularly the banks. If being amused is the goal of your reading, today, you might want to skip over this article. However, if you truly desire to begin to get an idea of how things work, then you will not be disappointed.
Before revealing the partial extent that money fraud has been revealed to me, let’s review the major facts as ascertained by my DEA informant.
1. The SANCHEZ-Paredes drug cartel provides the bulk of drugs to the Sinaloa cartel.
2. The SANCHEZ-Paredes cartel is protected by the American trained Peruvian military and has strong ties to Hamas, an international terrorist organization.
3. The last three DEA special agents who attempted to investigate the SANCHEZ-Paredes were fired by DEA station director, Patrick Stenkamp. The leaders of the SANCHEZ-Paredes cartel travel freely to the United States and own homes in the country. This would require the State Department and the DEA “to look the other way”.
4. In Chicago district court testimony, it was revealed that the Sinaloa cartel struck a deal with the DEA to provide intelligence on other cartel drug shipments in exchange for a guarantee for shipping in 80% of its drugs to the United States without interference. As outrageous as this claim was, the validation of this fact did not require the revelation of an informant. The media coverage of this event is overwhelming, even if it was mostly ignored by the MSM. Defenders of the deal say that this is the cost of catching most of the drug dealers and drug shipments. Skeptics see the DEA as being involved in protecting the drug shipments of the elite from competition.
This installment reveals, to some extent, the existence of an elaborate money laundering scheme which must exist in order to legitimize the drug profits.
Before presenting the money laundering schemes, let’s first take a look at banking laws that the average American citizen must follow.
There are definitive banking regulations that you, as an American, must follow. If you do not, you go to prison for a very long time.  Let’s review the draconian regulations that you you must follow, but the federal government and its agencies, such as the DEA and the State Department have no similar restrictions.
Federal law requires that a bank file a report based upon any withdrawal or deposit of $10,000 or more on any single given day. The law was designed to put a damper on money laundering, sophisticated counterfeiting and other federal crimes.
To remain in compliance with the law, financial institutions must obtain personal identification, information about the transaction and the social security number of the person conducting the transaction.
Technically, there is no federal law prohibiting the use of large amounts of cash. However, a CTR must be filed in ALL cases of cash transaction regardless of the reason underlying the transaction. This means your cash transaction will be on the radar. And when the feds come knocking, it will be up to you to prove your innocence as there will be a presumption of guilt because, more than likely, your accounts will be frozen or seized by the federal government.
There will undoubtedly be some geniuses whose math ability will tell them that all they have to do is to withdraw $9,999.99 and the bank and its protector, the federal government will be none the wiser. It is not quite that simple. Here are a few examples of structuring violations that one should be aware of:

1. Barry S. has obtained $15,000 in cash he obtained from selling his truck. He knows that if he deposits $15,000 in cash, his financial institution will be required to file a CTR. Instead he deposits $7,500 in cash in the morning with one financial institution employee and comes back to the financial institution later in the day to another employee to deposit the remaining $7,500, hoping to evade the CTR reporting requirement. Barry should have used multiple accounts to conduct this transaction. The Feds will be visiting Barry.
   
2. Hillary C. needs $16,000 in cash to pay for supplies for her arts and crafts business. Hillary cashes an $8,000 personal check at a financial institution on a Monday. She subsequently cashes another $8,000 personal check at the bank the following day. Hillary is careful to have cashed the two checks on different days and structured the transactions in an attempt to evade the CTR reporting requirement. Hillary should have made irregular deposits on staggered days. The Feds will be visiting Hillary.
   
3. A married couple, Bill and Hillary, sell a vehicle for $12,000 in cash. To evade the CTR reporting requirement, Bill and Hillary structure their transactions using different accounts. Bill deposits $8,000 of that money into his and Hillary’s joint account in the morning. Later that day, Hillary deposits $1,500 into the joint account, then $2,500 into her sister’s account, which is later transferred to Bill and Hillary’s joint account at the same bank. Again, Bill and Hillary should have used multiple banks. The Feds will be visiting Bill and Hillary.
   

The aggregate total of the three transactions totals more than the $10,000 threshold, therefore, a SAR would be filed by the bank and you would be the subject of a federal investigation as all three of the above cases clearly violate the federal banking laws related to structuring. It is a federal crime to break up transactions into smaller amounts for the purpose of evading the CTR reporting requirement. In these instances, the bank is required to file a SAR which serves to notify the federal government of an individual’s attempt to structure deposits or withdrawals by circumventing the $10,000 reporting requirement.
Structuring transactions to prevent a CTR from being reported can result in imprisonment for not more than five years and/or a fine of up to $250,000. If structuring involves more than $100,000 in a twelve month period or is performed while violating another law of the federal government, the penalty is doubled.
Much like the enforcement of our tax laws, the federal government’s enforcement of its banking laws as it relates to CTR’s, SAR’s and subsequent structuring is quite draconian. Civilian asset forfeiture laws come into play. The government can seize your bank accounts while it determines if a crime has been committed. There is no more presumption of innocence. The government can literally seize your assets in perpetuity without an order of the court. Of course, you could try and sue, but you will be up against the deep pockets of the federal government and the case could take years. By the time your case is decided, the financial banking crisis that you are so desperately trying to avoid by withdrawing your money, could be over.
In the following paragraphs, you will quickly see that that the drug cartels and the agencies of the federal government do not play by the same rules as you and I.
In subsequent voice and written communications, my DEA insider source revealed the following, “We identified a Peruvian Sanchez-Paredes cartel money laundering storefront in Miami called “Pacific Gateway”.  Pacific Gateway is a known money laundering source. An analysis of Pacific Gateway yielded an unpublished telephone party line number located in Lima, Peru that was owned by the Sanchez-Paredes gold mine company, Minersa San Simon. Telephone analysis showed that this number was communicating with stateside numbers connected to a dozen DEA, FBI and ICE cases involving drugs, money laundering and organized crime”. Subsequently, the DEA agents in Peru concluded that they had found “dirty agents” in these three federal agencies who were helping the SANCHEZ-Paredes cartel and the elite in this country who profit from drug trafficking, to launder their drug profits inside of the United States. Pacific Gateway was the port of entry for laundered Peruvian drug money and the DEA office in Lima had the proof as well being able to identify members of the FBI, DEA and ICE as participants in this plot.
Very quickly, the DEA special agents in Peru learned that major U.S. financial institutions were involved in the money laundering scheme. The DEA informant went on to say that, “We also noted that Peruvians associated with Pacific Gateway were operating in Phoenix and Connecticut.  Phoenix made sense because of its proximity to the border and the easy access to the Sinaloa cartel and the need to launder money was obvious. However, the Connecticut connection made no sense, that is until one follows the flow of money. A financial analysis demonstrated that Met-Mex Penoles, a Mexican gold company, is headquartered in Connecticut. Met-Mex Penoles underwrites the retirement system for the entire Peruvian Military.” This is how the Peruvian military is paid off.
(Editor’s Note: I have learned that Met-Mex Penoles is connected to Goldman Sachs and its partner, Wells Fargo Wachovia. Hence, we see the drug money now making it into the major players of the American financial system. And this is only one of the major ways that drug money was being laundered into major American banks). Outside of my DEA informant, I can prove these major banks, turned money laundering institutions, go even deeper, and are more deeply involved in this plot than anyone can imagine.)
It is at this point, ir is important to mention that the State Department is complicit in these money laundering schemes. It should be noted that all overseas financial transactions by the DEA must first be approved by the State Department. This means that nobody gets investigated, outside the United States, unless the State Department sanctions the expenditure. This gives the State Department complete power to kill any investigation and the State Department has done just that with regard to the SANCHEZ-Paredes cartel.
My DEA insider source further stated that, “The report which I submitted on my last day in the office was never published and a month after I submitted it the telephone number which we monitored went dead. All my efforts to find out why the report was not published we’re stonewalled by DEA management as there was no money in which to conduct an investigation.”  Remember, the State Department controls all foreign DEA spending. Further, it was revealed in Part One that the known criminals and leaders of the SANCHEZ-Paredes traveled freely to the United States where they also own homes. This would take State Department cooperation as well.
The informant went on to describe how a Peruvian generated report he filed led to the bust of a SANCHEZ-Paredes/Sinaloa drug ring in New York. He stated that “Prior to leaving Lima I provided a draft to DEA New York who used the information to seize $30 million dollars all of which was subsequently returned to the Sanchez-Paredes. This can be confirmed by news reports and official Southern a district of New York press releases”. One needs to understand that the State Department could not block the funding of the New York investigation because the operation was domestic. However, despite a money laundering asset seizure of $30 million dollars, the money was returned to the drug cartel(s). This means that the Department of Justice had to intervene. Why was the money returned to these criminals? Remember, in Part One, the Sinaloa cartel members gave testimony in a Chicago court  that they had reached an agreement to provide intelligence information to the DEA in exchange to bring their drugs into this country.
Serendipitously, I have interviewed John Cruz on a number of occasions on my radio show and much of the money laundering plot revealed to me by the DEA informant, was stumbled upon by Mr. Cruz. John Cruz was a former Vice President at HSBC bank in New York. John discovered that many of the accounts under his purview were money laundering enterprises in which the address for a series of bank accounts were no more than an abandoned houses or buildings with nothing more than a phone line. His investigation demonstrated that the Sinaloa cartel was the primary player in the money laundering on the part of HSBC bank. When Cruz approached senior level management at HSBC, he was told to keep his mouth shut or he would lose his job. John subsequently went to DHS and the FBI where he was ignored and he was fired by HSBC. He then went to the Manhattan District Attorney and he was advised to drop the matter because this was too dangerous to pursue. Cruz has written a book about his ordeal. The Cruz case also exposed the fact that these cartel members steal identities in order to open these “fake” accounts at HSBC bank. This is significant because we always here that identity theft is such an important issue and that the government is doing everything they can do to mitigate the danger, when in fact, these same government entities are complicit in the crime.
Last year, I interviewed decorated ex-FBI and DEA operative, Robert Mazur. Mazur was involved in the taking down of the Pablo Escobar cartel. He also participated in busting the BCCI banking scandal. On my show, Mazur named off a half a dozen large banks that are complicit in laundering drug money. In the final analysis, the DEA insider’s story is not really needed to make the case that our entire financial system is a criminal enterprise system. However, his revelations show the operation details and how legitimate law enforcement agents cannot really do their job.
HSBC bank is the “bankers bank”. This means that Bank of America, JP Morgan, etc., bank with HSBC. If they are dirty, then the whole banking system is dirty. These are the banks that comprise the Federal Reserve which runs our financial system.
In this article, we have seen the cooperation of DEA, the State Department, the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security. If legitimate DEA special agents do not have anywhere to turn with their field work discoveries, then how can any American trust the financial system? People have criticized me for advocating for getting as much of your money out of this corrupt financial system as possible. Perhaps the defenders of the system, may want to take a second look at a criminal system that they put so much faith in.
The American financial system is a criminal enterprise endeavor. Both federal and corporate entities have conspired to break this nation’s laws. You are expected to follow the laws as they related to CTR’s, SAR’s and structuring. However, the federal government breaks everyone of these laws on a daily basis. It is a case of rules for thee but not for me!
One might also want to ask what to the multitude of dead bankers have to do with this plot?
In addition to these revelations, the DHS insider also gave me details on how the DEA will be involved in upcoming gun confiscation, the Continuity of Government for the false flag events which could be coming and the preparations for mass detentions in this country. The DEA is so dirty that they even eat their own. More on these issues in a future installment on this series.
Dave Hodges is the Editor and Host of The Common Sense Show.
Don't forget to follow the D.C. Clothesline on Facebook and Twitter. PLEASE help spread the word by sharing our articles on your favorite social networks.
Share this:


Thanks to: http://www.dcclothesline.com