Monday, November 26, 2012

CME Declares Force Majeure at Manfra November 26th - due to Hurricane Sandy ? The Slog alleges EU and Asian Sources claim tungsten bars has gone sovereign - and is the US the culprit ? Beijing seems to think so , as per The Slog sources ! Also , note Deutsche Bank also alleged to have fulfilled recent gold repatriation requests with tungsten bars - wonder if that was a reason Josef Ackermann suddenly retired ? Regardless , the manipulations will come to an end - when it does , it will be flash crash fast ....

http://www.gata.org/node/11968


Grant Williams: Gold market manipulation is more than plausible

Submitted by cpowell on Wed, 2012-11-28 02:37. Section: 
9:40p ET Tuesday, November 27, 2012
Dear Friend of GATA and Gold:
Grant Williams, editor of the "Things That Make You Go Hmmm" letter, suggests in his letter published today that he follows GATA's work closely and gives it some credence, insofar as he notes in detail the growing demands for repatriation of central bank gold reserves held in vaults other than the owner's own.
Williams' broader topic is gold market manipulation, and he writes: "I believe there is no smoke without fire, and I always apply the two criteria of motive and means to any suspected conspiracy. In the case of gold (and silver), I cannot help but conclude that central banks and governments certainly have the motive to suppress prices (as they reveal only too clearly the extent to which the purchasing power of fiat currency is being debased), and as for the means. ...? Well, based on what we have seen in terms of intervention in the far larger sovereign bond markets in recent years, I think arguments over that particular part of the equation have been rendered somewhat redundant. ...
"The West sees gold as a means to hide the existence of inflation while the East sees it as protection from inflation. That means the West is selling gold whilst the East is buying it. ... The more central banks ask for audits and repatriation of their gold, the more that trend will accelerate; and the more that trend accelerates, the less gold will be left in the 'safe' confines of the Federal Reserve and the Bank of England."
Rephrasing a thought that came to your secretary/treasurer the other night as he mused that those who deny gold market manipulation have the difficult task of proving a negative --
-- Williams quotes from a play by the British novelist, comic, and academic China Mieville: "Is it more childish and foolish to insist that there is a conspiracy or that there is not?"
Here at GATA we don't like the word "conspiracy" because it seldom comes our way without "theory" or "theorists" close behind. But of course there are conspiracies here and there, and more importantly there are even public policies arising from the coordinated actions of governments or government agencies, polices that may involve "conspiracies" insofar as those who carry them out try to keep them secret. But such secrecy does not necessarily diminish the complaints of those who document any particular secret policy, as GATA long has done with the Western central bank gold price suppression scheme:
All we ask is that critics first take the time to familiarize themselves with the evidence that has been set out for them and then dispute it specifically.
Williams' new letter, its first 21 pages devoted to the growing indications of gold price suppression and headlined "The Mousetrap," is posted here --
-- and with it he has earned his tin-foil hat complete with earflaps just in time for the Northern Hemisphere's winter, if not the Kondratieff one.
CHRIS POWELL, Secretary/Treasurer
Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee Inc.


and...

http://www.gata.org/node/11965
 short takeaway - for GLD and SLV investors , if you are relying on the Regulators at FSA to protect your interest , you better re-read the prospectus carefully. You are at the mercy of the so called " good practices " rule of the  LMBA 

Alasdair Macleod: Custody arrangements reduce security for GLD and SLV shareholders

Submitted by cpowell on Tue, 2012-11-27 13:16. Section: 
By Alasdair Macleod
Tuesday, November 27, 2012
GLD, the New York Stock Exchange-listed gold exchange-traded fund, appears to have quietly removed key investor protection with the apparent agreement of United Kingdom regulators.
By imputation, the same change in regulation applies to the silver ETF SLV, though less obviously so.
A revision to GLD's prospectus appears to have absolved its custodian and trustee from having to comply fully with the custody rules of the U.K. Financial Services Authority, a change that must have been undertaken with the agreement of the FSA and by implication the Bank of England, which oversees the London bullion market and is party to the London Code for Non-investment Products (the NIPS Code). This code now guides the actions of the management, trustees, and custodians of both ETFs.
SLV's prospectus has not been materially altered in this respect (other than by the addition of New York as a custody location) because its wording is already consistent with NIPS Code guidelines. But GLD's prospectus has changed.
I know something about this because some time ago I wrote to the FSA on this very point.
But first let me impart a little background. As an investor in gold and silver ETFs I became aware of the concerns in the bullion investing community in the United States about the apparent lack of investor protection in the GLD and SLV prospectuses, together with the management and custodial agreements to which they refer -- concerns that were heightened by the obvious conflicts of interest between the custodians and other entities within the custodians' own organizations, given that they are also active as principals in both physical and derivative markets.
I am not conversant with legal agreements for such a fund when they are written under U.S. securities law, but I do have experience of similar agreements under English law, particularly where more than one jurisdiction is involved. Their wording appeared to me to be consistent with documentation for offshore funds.
At the risk of oversimplifying, it is standard practice for all the parties to management and custody agreements in an offshore fund structure to absolve themselves of all the risks they can think of and to commit to as little as possible. I presume it is this approach that has caused so much head-scratching for U.S. investors. The reason the English law approach works is because the investors rely on the fact that the parties to the agreement, principally the manager, trustee (if there is one), and the custodian, are all subject to securities regulation by a regulator that has power to inspect them, fine them, and to withdraw their licences to operate. So the FSA’s custody rules become the default guarantee on which investors in these two ETFs rely for the integrity of the assets they beneficially own. Without that guarantee or one of the same rigor, these documents offer little in the way of investor protection.
But there was in my mind one important doubt about the position of the FSA: In the U.K. physical commodities are not a regulated investment, unlike stocks, bonds, mutual funds, and derivatives, and are beyond regulatory scope. So did this give the ETF custodians a loophole allowing them to escape the custody regulations, even though they were holding themselves out to be regulated custodians?
In a letter dated August 22, 2011, I put this to the FSA, which I copy here:
* * *
22 August 2011
Dear Sirs:
RE: Custody services provided by authorised banks and other regulated entities for bullion-backed ETFs (iShares Silver Trust and SPDR Gold Trust)
I would be grateful for your clarification of the regulatory position of a regulated entity located in the U.K. providing custody services under a custody agreement for gold or silver bullion.
The question arises because in the case of iShares Silver Trust, JPMorgan Chase Bank N A, London Branch is custodian, and in the case of SPDR Gold Trust, the custodian is HSBC Bank USA, whose address in the prospectus is given as 8 Canada Square, London EC14 5HQ. In both cases, the counterparty to the custody agreements is Bank of New York Mellon. Both of these ETFs are the largest in the world of their type, and according to their prospectuses are fully backed by physical bullion.
The two custodians of these ETFs are also active in the futures markets in the United States (Comex) and it is common knowledge they are running large short positions in those markets. The perceived conflicts of interest have led to widespread public allegations that the assets of these ETFs are being used to satisfy market deliveries in bullion markets that are acutely short of physical, allegations that have not been refuted by the sponsors, trustee, or custodians.
Furthermore, the wording in the prospectuses and the related trustee and custody agreements appears to be somewhat loose without the support of regulatory protection.
I appreciate that it may be difficult for the sponsors to respond to these allegations, which of course is taken as evidence in the markets that they are true. The result is that a false market is being created in both paper and physical markets, either by allegations that are untrue and are not being refuted or by the misappropriation of physical assets not properly under the control of the custodians and without the knowledge of shareholders.
Accordingly, if the FSA does have regulatory exposure to either of the custodians or the trustee, it should be aware of these risks.
I would therefore be grateful for your confirmation that you are fully satisfied that the custodians retain full control over the ETF shareholders' property in accordance with the FSA rules and regulations that apply to authorised custodians. If they are exempt from the FSA’s rules and regulations I would similarly be grateful for an explanation why.
I look forward to your reply.
* * *
I did not get a reply for a considerable time, but after some chasing on my part, I received the following nearly three months later:
* * *
Dear Mr. Macleod:
Thank you for your letter dated 22 August 2011. In your letter you raise the following questions which I summarise below.
Custodians of bullion ETFs, which are apparently fully backed by bullion, are also apparently taking short positions in bullion futures. The concern raised is that the physical bullion backing the ETFs is inappropriately being used to support short futures transactions. Are these firms regulated by the FSA?
I will address the second concern first. HSBC Bank USA London Branch and JP Morgan Chase Bank NA are both authorised in the U.K. and have permissions for safeguarding and administering of assets. The Bank of New York Mellon is also authorised in the U.K. and has permission for the safeguarding and administering of assets. These activities are regulated under Chapter 6, (Custody Rules) of the Client Assets Sourcebook.
The relevant rule here is: CASS 6.4.1 prohibits a firm from using safe custody assets for its own account or the account of another client of the firm, unless:
-- the client has given express prior consent to the use of the safe custody assets on specified terms;
-- and the use of that client’s safe custody assets is restricted to the specified terms to which the client consents.
Regarding your first question we acknowledge your concerns and have passed your letter on to the supervisors of the relevant firms.
Yours sincerely,
Gerard Hurley, Clients Assets Policy
Financial Services Authority

* * *
Firstly, there is no evidence that "express prior consent" exists, suggesting that CASS 6.4.1 does apply. However, when you look at the actual rule, there are ambiguities about what constitutes safe custody assets. In the FSA Handbook, there are links to definitions that do not include physical commodities, excluding them by implication.
We need to turn to the Clients Assets Sourcebook (Common Platform Provisions) Instrument 2008 (as amended), and on Pages 10 and 11 we find:
"6.1.1A G -- The regulated activity of safeguarding and administering investments covers both the safeguarding and administration of assets (without arranging) and arranging the safeguarding and administration of assets, when those assets are either safe custody investments or custody assets. A safe custody investment is, in summary, a designated investment which a firm receives or holds on behalf of a client. Custody assets include designated investments, and any other assets that the firm holds or may hold in the same portfolio as a designated investment held for or on behalf of the client.
"6.1.1B R -- Firms to which the custody rules apply by virtue of CASS 6.1.1R(1B) must also apply the custody rules to those custody assets which are not safe custody investments in a manner appropriate to the nature and value of those custody assets."
This appears to confirm, as one would expect, that a regulated custodian cannot treat custody assets that are not designated as safe custody assets in a different manner. It is after all unreasonable to expect investors to accept a lower standard of custodianship because of a legal quirk.
Under the Clients Assets Sourcebook, bullion must be treated as if it was a safe custody asset.
In summary, the FSA's reply to my letter confirmed that investors in GLD and SLV were protected by the scope of the FSA's rules, which have the force of law. In other words, so long as the custodians complied with the FSA's Custody Rules, the concerns about the looseness of the prospectus' wording should not be a cause for undue concern in this regard.
Then something interesting happened: GLD re-issued its prospectus.
In GLD's prospectus issued in April 2012, under "Risk Factors" an extra paragraph has been inserted toward the end, as follows:
“The custody operations of the custodian are not subject to specific governmental regulatory supervision.
"The custodian is responsible for the safekeeping of the trust’s gold bullion that the custodian allocates to the trust in connection with the creation of baskets by authorized participants. The custodian also facilitates the transfer of gold in and out of the trust through unallocated gold accounts it maintains for authorized participants and the trust. Although the custodian is a market maker, clearer, and approved weigher under the rules of the LBMA, which sets out good practices for participants in the bullion market, the LBMA is not an official or governmental regulatory body. In addition, while the custodian is subject to general banking regulations by U.S. regulators and is generally regulated in the U.K. by the FSA, such regulatory provisions do not directly cover the custodian’s custody operations in the U.K. Accordingly, the trust is dependent on the custodian to comply with the best practices of the LBMA and to implement satisfactory internal controls for its custody operations in order to keep the trust's gold secure."
This appears to confirm that subsequent to my letter, which the FSA says it passed on to "the supervisors of the relevant firms," investors in GLD are being made aware they do not have the full protection of the FSA as regulator and instead are given the protection of "good practices of the LBMA."
Investor protection afforded for safe custody assets is at least in part being substituted by a dealing and settlement code of practice backed by LBMA-recommended client agreements that applies to an unregulated market.
Put another way, it appears that following my letter GLD's custodian has backed out of its previous arrangement that would enable the FSA to fulfill for bullion markets this has become extremely important, because both these ETFs are now the largest identifiable depositories of bullion outside government ownership. The redesignation of primary regulator from the FSA to the Bank of England, which has an obvious interest in managing bullion prices, should be an enormous concern for investors.
 its mandated responsibilities.
In the case of SLV there are no material changes in this respect between the latest prospectus (November 2012) and the 2010 prospectus. In fact, the wording is pretty much the same for the relevant clause in GLD's (Page 17 of 2010 and Page 18 of 2012):
"London Market Regulation -- Responsibility for the regulation of the major participants in the London bullion market lies with the Financial Services Authority (FSA) under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000. Under this Act, all U.K.-based banks, together with other investment firms, are subject to a range of requirements including capital adequacy, liquidity, and systems and controls.
"Conduct of business in the London bullion market falls under two jurisdictions dictated by the type of business. The FSA is responsible for 'investment business' as defined under the act. For the bullion market, this covers derivatives. The requirements upon firms in their dealings with market professionals are set out in the FSA's Inter-Professional Chapter, the IPC.
"For spot, forwards, and deposits in silver, which are not covered by the act, guidelines for the conduct of business are set out in The London Code of Conduct for Non-Investment Products, the NIPs code. Market practitioners representing the foreign exchange, money, and bullion markets in conjunction with the Bank of England have drawn up this code. It sets out the standards of conduct and professionalism expected between market practitioners with each other and with their clients, according to the London Bullion Market Association.”
So SLV, in the light of GLD's move from FSA to NIPS Code regulation, has not had to alter its prospectus, a point I missed when I first wrote to the FSA. And so apparently had the FSA -- because the existence of this clause in SLV's prospectus compromised the FSA's responsibilities, which might further explain why it took so long for the FSA to reply to my letter.
This matters because in the case of a breach of the spirit of the FSA rules (and not just the letter), the FSA has the power to require the custodian to remedy it, possibly fine the custodian, and amend the rules accordingly. If instead the FSA accepts that a custodian's actions are governed by a market-driven code, then its powers to protect the beneficial owners of custody assets may be compromised.
In summary, it appears to me that the shifting of regulatory responsibility for custody of client assets from the FSA to the LBMA/BoE NIPS Code weakens the integrity of these two ETFs, supporting the concerns expressed by many Americans in the investing public. The material doubts raised by this uncertainty should in all equity be remedied by the parties to the trust structures.
If it is correct that there has been a material change in regulatory status, they should consider reissuing their prospectuses to address this and other issues that have arisen, bringing them up to date with best practice of other independent ETFs, and should thoroughly address potential conflicts of interest.
To restore public confidence that bullion stocks are not compromised by these conflicts of interest they should consider full independently conducted metal audits to establish and identify the bullion actually held beyond doubt.


http://harveyorgan.blogspot.com/2012/11/gold-and-silver-hitthe-december-silver.html

Good evening Ladies and Gentlemen:

Gold closed down today to the tune of $7.30 to finish the comex session at $1742.20.  Silver fell by 16 cents down to $33.98. Now that options have expired, expect to have huge volatility in gold and silver as the crooked bankers try desperately to prevent longs from taking delivery this Friday.

In the access market at 5: 00 pm here is how gold and silver are trading at this time;

gold;  $1741.80
silver:  $34.04

In physical news, the COT report was released late last night and in the silver COT, we witnessed a massive increase in short positions held by JPMorgan.  They are now up to 34% of the entire comex future short positions held.

Alastair MacLeod has provided a dynamite commentary with respect to the GLD and SLV where the proprietors  have changed their prospectus' to reduce the security for these vehicles.  You may not have the protection you thought you had as it puts the custodians of those vehicles off the hook.

As for paper news, the big story was the announced Greek rescue plan.
I urge you to read Mark Grant's two commentaries on this issue as he dissected the garbage that the EU provided and put it in simple English for us.Bruce Krasting has come up with a good commentary on what to expect next year with new rules courtesy of the SEC for the money market funds.  Expect the funds to have real floating values and thus the risk of breaking the buck will be high.  Also a very important read for those who have considerable amount of cash in the money market funds.  We have these and many more stories for you tonight but first..................................

let us now head over to the comex and assess the damage in the precious metals today.  The total comex gold open interest fell slightly today by 80 contracts from 493,245 down to 492,435. Yesterday we were down in gold price so this is understandable.  The non active November gold contract month saw it's OI rise by 4 contracts.  We had 0 notices filed yesterday so in essence we gained another 4 contracts or 400 oz of additional gold is standing.  We are now 3 days away from first day notice in gold.  The big December contract saw it's OI fall by 36,996 from 192,230 to 155,234.  The December contract is now off the board for regular patrons and now we await for those wishing to take delivery or roll.  The estimated volume today was very good at 250,737 as we probably had a few more paper players convert into February or April.  The confirmed volume yesterday was also very good at 248,073.

The total silver comex OI fell in sympathy with gold to the tune of 1492 contracts.  The total silver complex OI remains very elevated at 153,396 compared to yesterday's level of 154,888.  The non active November contract saw it's OI fall by 2 contracts.  We had one delivery notice filed yesterday so we lost 1 contract or 5,000 oz of silver standing for the November contract month.  As stated above, we are 3 days away from first day notice in the silver contract for the December contract month.  Here the OI fell marginally by 10,028 from 43,917 down to 33,889.  Judging from yesterday's huge volume, I would have thought that the OI for December would be less.  If we average 4000 contracts rolling per day for the next 4 days we would have almost 18,000 contracts in silver standing or 90 million oz.  That would surely break the bank.The estimated volume today was extremely high at 86,905.  The confirmed volume yesterday was humongous at 106,701.

 *  *  * 
Because of the U.S. Thanksgiving holiday on Thursday, the Commitment of Traders Report was delayed until yesterday...and I was shocked at what it showed.
In silver, the Commercial net short position increased by a very chunky 4,225 contracts...or 21.1 million ounces. The Commercial net short position now sits at 275.9 million ounces. On a net basis, the 'big 4' short holders are short more than 44.0% of the entire Comex futures market in silver...263 million ounces worth, almost the size of the entire Commercial net short position.
Ted Butler says that JPMorgan Chase holds 34.0 percentage points of that total on its own...so it's a good bet that Scotiabank/Scotia Mocatta holds the lion's share of the remaining 10 percentage points. It's my opinion that there are only two big shorts that matter...and these are them.
But, just to keep piling it on, the '5 through 8' big short holders are short another 8.9 percentage points. However, in the grand scheme of things, the positions of the '5 through 8' traders...plus the smallest two traders in the 'Big 4' category...are immaterial, as they can only possible hold a percentage point or two of the short position apiece. On a net basis, the 'Big 8' are short 52.9% of the entire Comex silver market...and JPMorgan chase is short 34 percentage points of that amount all by itself.
In gold, the Commercial net short position increased by 11,269 contracts, or 1.13 million ounces. The Commercial net short position in gold now sits at 23.61 million ounces. The 'Big 4' are short 14.94 million ounces of gold, which represents 34.3% of the entire Comex futures market on a 'net' basis. The '5 through 8' traders are short an additional 5.59 million ounces of gold, or 12.9% of the entire Comex futures market on a 'net' basis. Adding this up, the 'Big 8' are short about 47.2% of the entire futures market in gold...and that's a minimum number.

*   *   * 

Ted Butler on the COT report:


"By my calculations, JPMorgan is holding a net short position of 35,000 contracts in COMEX silver futures, one of their largest short positions ever, as of the latest COT. That’s the equivalent of 175 million oz. Because there was also a large increase in spread positions in the Disaggregated COT report, JPM’s market share is now up to 34% of the entire short side of the COMEX silver futures market. While I am stating this as factually as possible, it almost qualifies as being unbelievable."
Nothing free market about this. If you want a visual and historic representation of the COT reports going back about 16 year...these linked interactive charts show the short and long term trends for all COT categories, which are visible at a glance. For gold the link is here...and for silver the link is here.

*  *  * 






http://www.caseyresearch.com/gsd/edition/ted-butler-manipulation-time-line



Ted Butler: A Manipulation Time Line

Nov
27
"It appears that Friday's price rally in all precious metals was met with massive short selling by JPMorgan Chase et al"


¤ YESTERDAY IN GOLD AND SILVER

It was a pretty quiet day price wise all over Planet Earth on Monday.  Gold traded mostly within a five dollar price range.
However, gross volume was very heavy, which is no surprise as we head into the final few days of roll-overs out of the December contract.  Everybody with a December futures contract that isn't standing for physical delivery has to be out by the end of the trading day on Wednesday at the latest.
Gold closed at $1,749.40 spot...down $2.50 from Friday's close.  Once again there was no follow-through from Friday's big up day...and I'll have much more on this in 'The Wrap' further down.  Gross volume was 247,000 contracts, but once the roll-overs were subtracted out, the net volume was light at only 84,000 contracts or so.
It was almost the same story in silver, except there was somewhat more 'volatility in the silver price...and the attempted rally at the Comex open ran into the usual not-for-profit crooks.
Silver closed at $34.18 spot...up a whole nickel from Friday's close.  Gross volume was monstrous at 106,000 contracts, but netted out it was only around 26,500 contracts.
The dollar index did virtually nothing on Monday, although it began to weaken a bit starting at 3:00 p.m. in New York trading, where it fell 20 basis points down to the 80.05 mark...and then rallied a hair into the close.  The index finished at 80.13...down a mere 8 basis points from Friday.  Nothing to see here.
Here's the 2-day dollar index chart.  It includes the 6:00 p.m. Sunday night open in New York.
The gold stocks gapped down a bit at the open...hit their nadir around 10:30 a.m. in New York, which was gold's low price tick...and then rallied a bit from there.  But shortly before 2:00 p.m. a rally with some legs ensued...and most of the day's losses were eliminated by the 4:00 p.m. Eastern time equity market close.  The HUI finished down a tiny 0.17%.
The silver stocks didn't go quite as well as the gold stocks, even though the price finished in the black.  Nick Laird's Silver Sentiment Index closed down 0.82%.
As expected the CME Daily Delivery Report wasn't much, as the November delivery month is virtually over.  It showed that 9 gold and 7 silver contracts were posted for delivery tomorrow.
There were no reported changes in either GLD or SLV.
It was a different story over at the U.S. Mint yesterday.  They sold 8,500 ounces of gold eagles...500 one-ounce 24K gold buffaloes...and 400,000 silver eagles.
The Comex-approved depositories reported receiving 690,125 troy ounces of silver on Friday...and shipped 157,945 troy ounces out the door.  Virtually all of the action was at Scotia Mocatta...and the link to that activity is here.
Because of the U.S. Thanksgiving holiday on Thursday, the Commitment of Traders Report was delayed until yesterday...and I was shocked at what it showed.
In silver, the Commercial net short position increased by a very chunky 4,225 contracts...or 21.1 million ounces.  The Commercial net short position now sits at 275.9 million ounces. On a net basis, the 'big 4' short holders are short more than 44.0% of the entire Comex futures market in silver...263 million ounces worth, almost the size of the entire Commercial net short position.
Ted Butler says that JPMorgan Chase holds 34.0 percentage points of that total on its own...so it's a good bet that Scotiabank/Scotia Mocatta holds the lion's share of the remaining 10 percentage points.  It's my opinion that there are only two big shorts that matter...and these are them.
But, just to keep piling it on, the '5 through 8' big short holders are short another 8.9 percentage points.  However, in the grand scheme of things, the positions of the  '5 through 8' traders...plus the smallest two traders in the 'Big 4' category...are immaterial, as they can only possible hold a percentage point or two of the short position apiece.  On a net basis, the 'Big 8' are short 52.9% of the entire Comex silver market...and JPMorgan chase is short 34 percentage points of that amount all by itself.
In gold, the Commercial net short position increased by 11,269 contracts, or 1.13 million ounces.  The Commercial net short position in gold now sits at 23.61 million ounces.  The 'Big 4' are short 14.94 million ounces of gold, which represents 34.3% of the entire Comex futures market on a 'net' basis.  The '5 through 8' traders are short an additional 5.59 million ounces of gold, or 12.9% of the entire Comex futures market on a 'net' basis.  Adding this up, the 'Big 8' are short about 47.2% of the entire futures market in gold...and that's aminimum number.
Here are a few sentences I stole from silver analyst Ted Butler's short Monday commentary to his clients regarding yesterday's COT Report...
"By my calculations, JPMorgan is holding a net short position of 35,000 contracts in COMEX silver futures, one of their largest short positions ever, as of the latest COT. That’s the equivalent of 175 million oz. Because there was also a large increase in spread positions in the Disaggregated COT report, JPM’s market share is now up to 34% of the entire short side of the COMEX silver futures market. While I am stating this as factually as possible, it almost qualifies as being unbelievable."
Nothing free market about this.  If you want a visual and historic representation of the COT reports going back about 16 year...these linked interactive charts show the short and long term trends for all COT categories, which are visible at a glance.  For gold the link ishere...and for silver the link is here.
Yesterday's COT Report snapshot of the 'big 4' and 'big 8' short-side traders comes in this excellent graph of "Days of World Production to Cover Comex Short Positions" as provided by Nick Laird.
It's my belief that almost the entire red bar in silver is made up of the short positions of JPMorgan and Scotiabank/Scotia Mocatta.  As I said before, the short positions of the other six traders in the '8 or less' category...are immaterial.
Reader E.W.F...who was kind enough to send out a full set of charts from that data contained in the Disaggregated COT Report...sent me this table of numbers, along with the following comments...
"The silver top 4 net short position hasn't been this large since September 28, 2010.  Silver open interest hasn't been this high since November 9, 2010.  The current silver COT structure is remarkably similar to the COT structure seen in late 2010 when the silver price started to spike."
Without doubt, we're probably beyond those 2010 numbers at this point already, as the deterioration on Friday was shocking...and I'll have more on that in 'The Wrap'.
Since it's my Tuesday column, I have more than the usual number of stories for you today...and I'll happily leave the final edit up to you.


*   *  * 

Spain to get EU bank aid Dec. 15 in return for job losses: Report

European authorities will transfer 35 billion euros to Spain's state bank rescue fund on Dec. 15 in exchange for massive layoffs at Spain's four nationalised banks, including state-rescued Bankia, El Pais newspaper reported on Sunday.
The cash injection from European bailout funds will be disbursed to troubled Spanish banks two weeks after it is paid into Spain's bank restructuring fund, or FROB, the paper said.
Bankia, which sought a 23.5 billion euro bailout from the state in May, is expected to be forced to lay off up to 6,000 people from its current 20,000 staff, while NovaGalicia Bank is seen laying off 2,000 of its 5,800 workforce, said El Pais, citing European and banking sources.
Bankia and NovaGalicia Bank declined to comment on the report, which also said the banks would have to close 1,000 branches between the two of them.
This Reuters story, filed from Madrid early on Sunday morning Eastern time, is a little something that I borrowed from yesterday's edition of the King Report.  The link is here.


Denying Reality: Germany's Ongoing Refusal to Forgive Greek Debt

An elegant appearance is important to Christine Lagarde. The head of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) wears her short hair carefully coiffed, and diamonds glitter on her manicured fingers. When she talks about global financial issues, she hardly ever raises her voice. Her colleagues at the Washington-based financial authority call her "Ms. Perfect."
But last Tuesday Lagarde, who was once French finance minister, was having trouble keeping her composure. She had hurried back to Europe from Asia to attend the latest in a series of Euro Group crisis meetings on Greece. And even though she had a fever and felt weak from the flu, she began to raise her voice as she spoke. For Greece to recover, she insisted, creditor countries would have to forgive the government in Athens a large share of its debt. "Nothing else will work," Lagarde said.
But the group, most notably Germany's impassive Foreign Minister Wolfgang Schäuble, from Chancellor Angela Merkel's Christian Democratic Union (CDU), refused to budge. The meeting ended unsuccessfully at around 5 a.m. and was adjourned until this Monday.
This story was posted on the German website spiegel.de yesterday...and my thanks go out to Roy Stephens once again for sending it along.  The link ishere.


CME Declares Force Majeure at Manhattan Gold Depository

CME Group Inc. on Monday said that Manfra, Tordella and Brookes Inc., one of the exchange's gold depositories, will not be able to delivery metal as the lower Manhattan company deals with "operational limitations" almost a month after the arrival of Hurricane Sandy.
MTB, one of five depositories licensed to deliver gold against CME's benchmark 100-troy ounce gold contract, held 29,276 troy ounces of gold and 33,000 troy ounces of palladium as of Nov. 23, according to data from CME subsidiary Comex.
In a notice to customers on Monday, CME declared force majeure, a contract clause that frees parties from liability due to an event outside of their control, for the facility.
CME said that individuals holding MTB warrants, or certificates for a specific lot of metal stored in the depository, may receive gold delivered from Brinks Co. in New York. MTB is responsible for any additional costs incurred by customers receiving metal from Brinks, CME said.
This Dow Jones Newswire story was picked up by the foxbusiness.com Internet site yesterday...and the link is here.


Austrian Press Agency cites GATA in report on possible audit of Austria's gold

The Oesterreichische Nationalbank (OeNB) last week revealed a lot about the 280 tons of gold held by the Republic of Austria, but to which part of it they really have access is hard to identify, according to a U.S. organization that has been working for 15 years on the international gold market.
"In order to know that, the bank would have to disclose not only how much it has lent out up to date, but also whether the gold is held in allocated or unallocated accounts," Chris Powell of the Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee (GATA) told APA over the weekend.
The OeNB was forced to admit last week in Parliament that 80 percent of Austria's national gold is in London and explained that the bank has earned 300 million euros in the past decade with gold-leasing operations. After an expert commented that this suggested that a large part of the gold was leased out, the bank leaked that currently only 16 percent of the reserves are affected. The bank gave no explanation for the relatively high income from gold lending.
According to GATA, allocated gold means that the bars are accurately weighted and have serial numbers that can be directly attributed to the owner and the bars must be handed over at the depositor's request. Unallocated gold is merely a claim against the storing institution, in this case, for example, the Bank of England (BoE) and the Bank for International Settlements (BIS).
There's a lot more to this story in this GATA release from yesterday...and I consider it a must read.  The link is here.


Ted Butler: A Manipulation Time Line

A friend and long-time subscriber who intends to write a book about the silver manipulation asked if I could provide him with a bit of history. To my mind, the silver manipulation dates back to early 1983, when the commercial traders grew confident that they could sell any quantity of paper short contracts to the technical fund buyers on the COMEX. By that time the commercials learned that technical fund buyers would never take physical delivery and could be counted on to buy or sell based upon price signals that the commercials could easily influence and control. In essence, the game has remained remarkably similar ever since.
While the commercials learned to behave collusively when dealing with the technical funds, there was an additional requirement that there would be one large commercial standing ready to be the short seller of last resort to backstop the combined commercial effort. Without a “Mr. Big” standing behind and guaranteeing that the combined commercial effort to trick the technical funds would never get overpowered, the long term silver manipulation would not have been possible. Over the past 30 years, there have been a series of Mr. Big’s that have been the paper silver short sellers of last resort. Therefore, the history of the silver manipulation can be recorded along the lines of who was the big short seller at any particular time.
This is Ted's commentary from last Wednesday that I was hoping that he would post in the clear...and he has done so.  I know it's three-in-a-row...but this is a must read as well. It's posted in the clear on the silverseek.comInternet site...and the link is here.


¤ THE WRAP

There are only two  mistakes one can make along the road to truth; not going all the way, and not starting. - Buddha
I was disappointed, but not entirely surprised by the fact that there was no follow-through price action to the upside on Monday, after Friday's big day in all four precious metals.  What did surprise me was the monstrous increase in the preliminary open interest numbers for both gold and silver that were posted on the CME's website early Saturday morning.  I was expecting/hoping that there would be some major reduction when the final numbers were posted late Monday morning Eastern time...but there wasn't.  There were almost no changes at all.
It appears that Friday's price rally in all precious metals was met with massive short selling by JPMorgan Chase et al...as there is no other explanation for such a big increase in open interest.  The bullion banks, led by JPM...are going short against all comers.
I mentioned in my closing comments about yesterday's Commitment of Traders Report that we have probably already exceeded the October 2010 figures for open interest, Commercial net short position...and short positions for the big 4 and big 8 that reader EWF showed in his table of numbers just above the 'Critical Reads' section above.  As Ted Butler correctly pointed out in his COT commentary yesterday, all will be revealed with this Friday's Commitment of Traders Report.  Based on what I've seen so far, it's going to be ugly.
At the moment, the final roll-overs out of the December delivery month are in progress...and it should be all wrapped up by the close of trading tomorrow.
Today is the cut-off for this Friday's Commitment of Traders Report, so most of the roll-over data will be in it.
Here are the 6-month gold and silver charts.  Yes, the rallies on Friday show that we've broken nicely above the 50-day moving averages in both metals.  Can we go higher from here?  Absolutely, but based on the COT data, we're much closer to a top then a bottom...and unless JPMorgan Chase et al get over run, or puts their hands in their pockets and do nothing as this rally progresses, or start buying back part of their massive short position...this rally will end the same as every other rally...in tears.  We've seen this picture many times before.
(Click on image to enlarge)
In overnight trading, gross volume is decent in gold...and very heavy in silver.  But once the roll-overs are removed, volumes sink to fumes and vapour.  I expect this situation to continue for the rest of the Tuesday session.   The prices of both metals aren't doing much of anything...and the dollar index is still hanging in just above the 80.00 level...and is up about 14 basis points from Monday's New York close.
Unless something comes out of left field during the next four days, I'm not expecting a lot of price fireworks until after the December contract goes off the board.  Once we get into next week, then we'll see what the lay of the land is when we have Friday's COT Report under our belts.
That's more than enough for one day...and I'll see you here tomorrow.




      and......

      http://hat4uk.wordpress.com/2012/11/27/gold-breaking-force-majeure-supplier-suffered-major-sales-reverse-this-year/


      GOLD BREAKING: ‘force majeure’ supplier suffered major sales reverse this year

       MTB recently took on massive premises purchase, followed by huge turnover slump

       Manfra, Tordella and Brookes, the Top 5 New York gold exchange depositor which announced last night it will not be able to deliver metal until further notice due to force majeure, decided to move from renting to the purchase last February of a ritzy condominium in the Extell Development’s new International Gem Tower. But then in May the firm was badly hit by the slump in precious metal sales.
      The company claims it is struggling with “operational limitations” following the recent storms. But it’s now nearly a month since Hurricane Sandy.
      MTB, one of only five US outfits with a license to deliver gold, holds 29,276 troy ounces of gold according to data from Comex. Comex’s owner CME declared what’s called “force majeure” an act of God (but not Mammon) that frees MTB from liability due to events beyond its control.

      The company did post on its website about having “sustained substantial damage” a fortnight ago. And naturally, anyone can still get The Real Thing delivered via Brinks: plus, MTB is responsible for any additional costs incurred by customers who want to use that process.
      But this afternoon, I find myself wondering what will happen if (or when) everyone suddenly decides they want their gold right now.
      MTB is a privately owned bank still largely under the control of the Tordella banking family. Its chairman is Frederic N. Tordella. It converted to being a retail bank in 1993.
      In February of this year, it took on a new not-yet-finished office condominium in the International Gem Tower. There it will buy the condo – and double its premises size to more than 10,000 square feet on the third floor – with another 2,500 square feet of below-grade space – in the now rising 34-story, mid-block tower on West 47th Street. According to Raizy Haas, senior vice president for development at developer Extell, “They were a little nervous about buying space and moving their operations. They took a long term view and became comfortable with the fact that they were going to own rather than rent.”
      Nobody was available to comment today about whether the level of comfort had gone up or down. However, what we can be sure about is that MTB President Mike Kramer told the London Financial Times last May, “There are days here where we wonder if the phones are working”. At the time, he estimated that sales of gold, silver coins and small bars had fallen 50% in the previous two months.
      File this one under ‘informed speculation’.
      Postscript: At 9/11, MTB had its gold stored under the World Trade Center.



      http://www.silverdoctors.com/december-gold-delivery-in-jeopardy-cme-declares-force-majeure-at-manhattan-gold-depository/



      ( Funny the operational limitations from Hurricane Sandy developed one month after the fact - I'm sure that has nothing to do with a Shortage of real not Tungsten substitutes.... ) 





      DECEMBER GOLD DELIVERY IN JEOPARDY? CME DECLARES FORCE MAJEURE AT MANHATTAN GOLD DEPOSITORY

      NOVEMBER 27, 2012 BY  4 COMMENTS
      The CME declared a Force Majeure Monday at PAMP’s Manfra, Tordella and Brookes Inc. gold depository, and stated the depository will not be able to deliver physical gold due to “operational limitations” from Hurricane Sandy.
      The only thing that surprises us is that HSBC and JPM’s gold depositories were not included in the announcement.  It appears however that for now, those holding MTB warrants will be able to receive gold from Brinks.  The inconvenience and extra cost associated with arranging delivery from Brinks however will likely dissuade many from standing for December delivery, and is likely the true motive for the announcement.   How convenient for the bullion banks in the midst of a physical gold shortage!  ”Um, sorry sir, we apologize, Brinks is having trouble getting through the backlog of MTB delivery requests.  We expect your gold should be delivered sometime in January- February at the latest!”.

      NEW YORK–CME Group Inc. (CME) on Monday said that Manfra, Tordella and Brookes Inc., one of the exchange’s gold depositories, will not be able to deliver metal as the lower Manhattan company deals with “operational limitations” almost a month after the arrival of Hurricane Sandy.


      Nasdaq.com reports that the Force Majeure will free MTB from the liability of breaching gold delivery contracts:
      MTB, one of five depositories licensed to deliver gold against CME’s benchmark 100-troy ounce gold contract, held 29,276 troy ounces of gold and 33,000 troy ounces of palladium as of Nov. 23, according to data from CME subsidiary Comex.
      In a notice to customers on Monday, CME declared force majeure, a contract clause that frees parties from liability due to an event outside of their control, for the facility.

      CME said that individuals holding MTB warrants, or certificates for a specific lot of metal stored in the depository, may receive gold delivered from Brinks Co. (BCO) in New York. MTB is responsible for any additional costs incurred by customers receiving metal from Brinks, CME said.

      The CME states that those wishing to stand for December delivery should not be adversely affected by the Force Majeure:
      “This shouldn’t have a material impact on the way market participants are doing business,” a CME spokesman said. ” They’ll still contact MTB if they want to take delivery on contracts,” and MTB will arrange for delivery through Brinks.

















      http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-11-27/cme-declares-force-majeure-due-%E2%80%9Coperational-limitations%E2%80%9D-nyc-gold-depository

      ( Force Majeure - due to Hurricane Sandy ? )


      CME Declares Force Majeure Due To “Operational Limitations” On NYC Gold Depository

      Tyler Durden's picture
      Submitted by Tyler Durden on 11/27/2012 07:47 -0500



      CME Declares Force Majeure Due To “Operational Limitations” On NYC Gold Depository
      Today’s AM fix was USD 1,747.25, EUR 1,349.54, and GBP 1,090.46 per ounce.
      Yesterday’s AM fix was USD 1,747.25, EUR 1,347.56, and GBP 1,090.87 per ounce.
      Silver is trading at $34.08/oz, €26.41/oz and £21.34/oz. Platinum is trading at $1,620.50/oz, palladium at $666.40/oz and rhodium at $1,065/oz.

      *   *   * 


      CME Group declared a force majeure at one of its New York precious metals depositories yesterday, run by bullion dealer and major coin dealer Manfra, Tordella and Brooks (MTB), due to “operational limitations” posed by Hurricane Sandy.

      MTB has “operational limitations” following Hurricane Sandy and can’t load gold bullion, platinum bullion or palladium bullion, CME Group Inc., the parent of the Comex and New York Mercantile Exchange, said today in a statement.

      MTB must provide holders with metal at Brinks Inc. in New York to meet current outstanding warrants in relevant delivery periods with compensation for costs, Chicago-based CME said.
      The CME said that MTB will not be able to deliver metal as the lower Manhattan company deals with "operational limitations" almost a month after the arrival of Hurricane Sandy.
      MTB is one of five depositories licensed to deliver gold against CME's benchmark 100-troy ounce gold contract, held 29,276 troy ounces of gold and 33,000 troy ounces of palladium as of Nov. 23, according to data from CME subsidiary Comex.

      In a notice to customers on Monday, CME declared force majeure for the facility, a contract clause that frees parties from liability due to an event outside of their control.

      CME said that individuals holding MTB warrants or certificates for a specific lot of metal stored in the depository, may receive gold delivered from Brinks Co. (BCO) in New York. MTB is responsible for any additional costs incurred by customers receiving metal from Brinks, CME said.

      "This shouldn't have a material impact on the way market participants are doing business," a CME spokesman said. "They'll still contact MTB if they want to take delivery on contracts," and MTB will arrange for delivery through Brinks according to Dow Jones Newswires.
      In a notice posted to its website dated Nov. 12, MTB said the firm "sustained substantial damages" following Hurricane Sandy's arrival in New York City on Oct. 29, and had curtailed its operations.

      The force majeure will remain in effect until further notice from the exchange, the CME said. The delivery period for CME's December-delivery precious metals futures begins on Friday.











      http://www.silverdoctors.com/source-deutsche-bank-fulfilled-recent-gold-repatriation-request-with-tungsten-salted-gold/#more-17877


      SOURCE: DEUTSCHE BANK FULFILLED RECENT GOLD REPATRIATION REQUEST WITH TUNGSTEN SALTED GOLD

      NOVEMBER 26, 2012 BY  13 COMMENTS
      *BREAKING
      An Austrian banking source has reportedly claimed thatDeutsche Bank ‘fulfilled’ one gold repatriation in recent years with the help of Tungsten and further claims that the tungsten salted gold bars have turned up in Asia.
      Widely scoffed at by the financial media in 2009, Kirby appears to have released a Pulitzer worthy story nearly half a decade ahead of its time, as if the Austrian source’s claims are true and Deutsche Bank has in fact fulfilled a recent gold repatriation request with gold plated tungsten, the ramifications are that not only is every single claim made by GATA regarding gold and silver manipulation are 100% accurate, but that real, physical metal is now in desperately short supply and the jig is nearly up for the bullion bank cartel.
      This is not 10 small retail PAMP bars found in the Manhattan jewelry district in which a retail jeweler was duped,but a sophisticated con of epic proportions, in which one of the world’s largest bullion banks has reportedly attempted to con a large client.
      The Slog reports that at least some of the tungsten tainted gold has now turned up in Asia and that as alleged by Rob Kirby, the source appears to be the US:
      A Slog source in Austria is now alleging that Deutsche Bank ‘fulfilled’ one gold repatriation in recent years with the help of Tungsten. He further claims that some of this has now turned up in Asia. Their origin is thought by Beijing to be the United States of America.

      This is no small retain scam:
      We are talking about an Establishment eurobank alleged to have been caught short on a fulfilment order, and using the tungsten scam to fill the gap.
      This is an entirely different criminal intent (from the Manhattan jewelry district discovery): not the somewhat crude attempt to con a retail greenhorn, but rather an well-planned and sophisticated ‘salting’ of the gold bars by a major bank….designed to fool even an expert engaged in approving the purchase for a large sovereign client.

      Unlike when Rob Kirby first reported the story in 2009, in the wake of the massive LIEBORGATE scandal, bullion banks fulfilling gold repatriation requests with tungsten salted gold is suddenly 100% believable by the general public.

      There is no reason at all for anyone to see this as far-fetched. The SME scams pulled by RBS, and Libor manipulations carried out across the piece of Establishment banking, have been solid evidence in recent times of desperation on the part of those suddenly faced with a brave new world where Berlin wants all its gold back….but the gold isn’t there any more.



      Mr. Chavez, you may want to consider having the subject of your photo-op, as well as your entire 100 tons of gold repatriated in 2011 remelted ASAP.  Or, perhaps you are already perfectly aware of this matter and that explains why the tungsten filled bars are suddenly turning up in Asia.

      No matter, if true and this story gains traction over the coming weeks, the cartel bullion bank gold and silver manipulation is history.












      http://hat4uk.wordpress.com/2012/11/26/gold-fraud-exclusive-eu-and-asian-sources-allege-the-tungsten-switch-has-gone-sovereign/


      GOLD FRAUD EXCLUSIVE: EU and Asian sources allege the tungsten-switch has gone sovereign

      Fool’s Gold? Deutsche Bank, China, and US embroiled in faking suspicions
      On and off for over five years now, I’ve been reporting on the existence or otherwise of (1) the gold the US Federal Treasury claims to have stored securely at various points across America and (2) a fix/manipulation scam on the price of gold per se. When I first raised these points (along with thousands of other sites) in late 2006, we were all of us consigned by the commentariat of the day to those Outer Limits reserved for The Loonies.
      Since that time, we have seen the mysteriously dramatic rise in the level of Chinese gold reserves, the admission by several central banks that they’ve been buying and selling the stuff below the radar, and the scandals involving manipulation of the Libor and Eubor rates which, on their own, make the claims of gold jiggery-pokery look considerably more credible.
      During 2009, I reported a couple of times about major gold investors known to me personally who were having trouble persuading Swiss storage facilities to cough up the shiny metal, once those gold-bugs decided they’d like to shift it to somewhere less remote than Cuckoo-clock land. Over the last few weeks, we have seen various sovereign States (led by Germany) saying they’d variously like to audit and/or shift their gold reserves nearer to home. The US Federal Reserve’s delay in obliging its clients with sight and shipping of said stocks has gone from being mildly amusing via odd to alarming.

      But now a new fraud has entered the frame.

      For those who don’t already know this, tungsten has very nearly  the same density as refined gold. Gold sells today at around $1740 an ounce, and Tungsten at $10 a pound. With a bit of judicious disguise, putting tungsten inside a gold bar can even fool an X-ray machine under certain circumstances. A Slog source in Austria is now alleging that Deutsche Bank ‘fulfilled’ one gold repatriation in recent years with the help of Tungsten. He further claims that some of this has now turned up in Asia.

      However, here’s the killer: since hearing this rumour (actually, it’s rather more than that, but I have a source to protect here) I’ve made a couple of calls and read some well-argued websites on the subject of tungsten issues. One consistent feedback concerns the Chinese opinion on these bars.

      Their origin is thought by Beijing to be the United States of America.
      Forbes rubbished the tungsten-in-gold story last March, but from a commonsense viewpoint I was struck by the article’s (a) apparent inability to see beyond drilling and infilling as the method, and (b) the author’s unwillingness to see the problem as only likely to occur in smallish shipments. Late last September, however, Zero Hedge ran a Tyler Durden piece confirming that several smaller retail gold bars sold in Manhattan had been found to have tungsten innards. The ZH take on this event was that it might be part of yet another Fed Reserve attempt to impugn gold’s validity, and thus keep investors locked into the stock market, bonds and property.
      But the thing I’m hearing about in this instance – while it could have the same Fed/Central Bank motive – is on an entirely different scale. Here we are talking about an Establishment eurobank alleged to have been caught short on a fulfilment order, and using the tungsten scam to fill the gap.

      This is an entirely different criminal intent: not the somewhat crude attempt to con a retail greenhorn, but rather an well-planned and sophisticated ‘salting’ of the gold bars by a major bank….designed to fool even an expert engaged in approving the purchase for a large sovereign client. Here, using perhaps as little as 25% tungsten would be enough to make up the embarrassing shortfall.

      There is no reason at all for anyone to see this as far-fetched. The SME scams pulled by RBS, and Libor manipulations carried out across the piece of Establishment banking, have been solid evidence in recent times of desperation on the part of those suddenly faced with a brave new world where Berlin wants all its gold back….but the gold isn’t there any more.

      The ramifications of this go far beyond a pro-am retail fraud. First off, ultimate discovery of the scam is a certainty: so you’d have to be pretty damned desperate to try it on. And second, I do find it intriguing that these reports have popped out of the woodwork just when the ECB is thought to be planning some form of gold-backing for any eventual eurobond issues – should the eurozone survive. Trust me, if Mario Draghi is capable of pulling the stunts he’s been at vis-a-vis Greek bailout ‘money’, Bank of Greece money-printing, and bondholder subordination, then like most Goldman Sachs graduates, he’s capable of anything.

      As I write, gold is trading at the upper end of $1746-1751 per oz.


      And note criminal manipulation activities continue unabated regarding silver and gold......


      MASSIVE SILVER RAID IN ACCESS MARKET TRADING AS SILVER FLASH SMASHED TO $31.80


      NOVEMBER 26, 2012 BY  15 COMMENTS

      Last week we reported what appeared to be a glitch asgold was flash smashed $30 under $1700 in a single tick late in electronic access market trading.
      Today it is apparently silver’s turn, as numerous platforms recorded a flash crash in silver from $34.10 to $31.80, almost immediately regaining the $34 level. [Read more...]

      GLITCH OR FLASH CRASH IN GOLD?


      NOVEMBER 21, 2012 BY  21 COMMENTS


      While it was likely a data glitch rather than a trading fat finger flash smash, tonight’s gold futures appeared to have been dropped vertically down the mine-shaft dropping $30 in a single tick, and stuffed under $1700 to $1699. 
      Whether flash smash or data glitch, the move has been subsequently wiped from the charts. 

      And from Bill Murphy's lips to God's ears......

      BILL MURPHY: JPMORGAN TO IMPLODE- SILVER SCANDAL REVEALED

      NOVEMBER 26, 2012 BY  15 COMMENTS
      Unconventional Finance has released another interview with GATA’s Bill Murphy discussing JP Morgan’s alleged manipulation of the silver market.  Murphy states that JP Morgan’s manipulation of the silver market will soon be revealed, and states that the JPM silver scandal will be larger than LIEBORGATE and may likely result in the implosion of JP Morgan Chase.
      Full interview below:

      Posted by at

      No comments:

      Post a Comment

      Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)