top of page
Writer's pictureCharity Colleen Crouse

Follow-up to public comment regarding Forms for Short-Term Loans through the Import-Export Bank



I once read the original founding treaty of the Import-Export Bank. In fact, I read it in May of 2018. It was of concern to me that at that time there were several evident vacancies in the executive leadership of the bank, specifically concerning various vice-president positions. They were not the only agency of such significance that had strategic vacancies at the time. I have not returned to their website since.

If I am correct, then among the things that was explicated in the founding treaty was that there was at the onset a finite amount of open capital that would be made available to projects as part of the war recovery effort. That would be extended for certain terms with certain re-payment schedules upon which certain levels of debt obligation would be taken into account. However, there was an element of the treaty that said that the Board of the Import-Export Bank had the right to cancel debt at any time it decided to. It was as if without ANY formal prior notice or process for redress, they could just cancel debt and obligations contingent upon that debt.

No one likes debt. But, debt obligations can also provide a foundation for credit development if in fact scheduled debt repayments can be met. So, if you are budgeting for projects and understand that there are timeframes involved with debt recovery or debt accrual then you might take a substantial loan like what you could get through the Import-Export Bank and then put together a long-term schedule based on accrual of credit over time after prioritizing certain securities and creditors in case there is an economic paradigm shift and contingencies as such need to be considered and implemented.

The U.S. banking system is substantially different than the European banking system in many ways. In one manner, the role of bonds and stocks and their prevalence in daily commercial activity is different. It was especially different at the time of the founding of the Import-Export Bank. If there had been fraud or deceit engaged in the provision of a loan, that is one thing. If there had been some sort of sabotage in order to mischaracterize something as a drawdown on an insurance claim then that is another. But, what if you engage in good faith, do what you can consistent with the abilities of your economy, and then in some sort of arbitrary and relativistic leveraging scheme to which you did NOT get a chance to participate, much less consent, someone decides to leverage YOUR success as a means by which to “offset” liabilities associated with someone deemed to be “bigger” or more opportune for political reasons?

Since I provided a public comment on the reports that were announced on June 7, 2019 concerning request for public comment regarding changes to forms associated with the Import-Export Bank, I have understood that the report was connected to some sort of “electronic account” and that my comment has been connected to currents associated with ACTUAL decisions regarding activities of the Import-Export Bank. Now, I have believed this to be my experience in some regards for a while. But, the last year has been an especially challenging time when it comes to “overnights.” There is not definitive identification or request for authentication when currents are run overnight to use temporary periods of finance for international deals. Sometimes I am able to assess on my own and identify currents that “node” in accordance with available public notices for consideration of how the specific current I am on is potentially calibrated. But, especially if we are talking about a temporary, high-risk, necessary and LEGAL activity that needs overnight assistance and there is an intent to confound their origin or the contributing sources of “income” in consideration of whether or not that benchmark is met in order to adjust or positively impact creditability, it amounts to a form of sabotage, as well as what I consider to be “money laundering.” I did NOT know what a public comment meant when I started to engage in providing public comments to various agencies. I DID understand that my life and work was being leveraged by OTHERS without them acknowledging it, compensating me, providing me with the necessary license or certifications to track and authenticate it, and was often connected to illegal activities that were “passed through” legal ones that I would have supported and would have contributed to willingly.

How the Federal Reserve’s overnight windows and the Import-Export Bank are directly connected is not something at this point I can say definitively. I believe that what happens is that there is some sort of security that is “underwritten” by what is publicly available the day of the issue or the announcement and that OTHER people who have licenses or the means can and do use my contributions for their efforts without contacting me, informing me, establishing terms for compensation or accountability, and then through whatever licit or illicit means to which they have access will run accounts connected to my activities to “finance” their endeavors, especially if they need a quick line of “working capital” overnight of for a short-term. I do believe my lack of “consummation” of many of the deals without authentication then causes them to “go bad” unless another “proxy” can be found to “flip” the current to within the appropriate time frame so she (or he) WILL consummate it and then…I do not believe often times that she (or he) is anymore acknowledged or affirmed in these processes than I am, I am just…insistent on being taken seriously “at that level.”

I understand and have believed for some time that I was intentionally engaged in offers of “credit” with the express intent on compelling me to “default” so that default could be leveraged by political opportunists who can “purchase” debt in order to “lien” on the debtor to cover their liabilities. It was completely and 100 percent engaged in “bad faith” and over and over again every effort I have attempted to pursue for redress has proven that with greater and greater accrual or consequences and associated risks regarding refusal to address these consequences. I am just one person, but there are entire national economies that I understand have been similarly engaged. So, I continue to keep “track” of it to the best of my ability and not only that…

I found recently an article that was written exactly three years to the day before I was born. It was a proposal for a specific modification to existing securities policies that I believe ACTUALLY supports what has been an effort on my own for at least the last three years to create a systemotology for tracking high-level securities to prevent against acts of money laundering. By the time I came along, let me tell you, there was a REAL need for implementation of such a system. There apparently still is.

Finish 9:59 am CST on May 6, 2020


Finish edit by 10:40 am CST

1 view0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

One short of 209...?

AMERICAN PLAYERS FILL THE VOID DURING JAI ALAI STRIKE, BUT NOT - Chicago Tribune Is I am correct, this jai alai players' strike started...

You cannot perform a credit default swap

When there was not default. Yesterday a journalist from Belarus was "released." Apparently today, a journalist from Ethiopia was...

Comments


bottom of page