Let's Get Honest! Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History

Identify the Entities, Find the Funding, Talk Sense!

Posts Tagged ‘Walter Burien

Re: CFCC and other Public Institution/Private Profit Partnering…The Public has already been Weighed in the Balance and Found (Dumbed-Down)

leave a comment »

I have several posts in the pipeline after a year-plus pause in publishing on this blog. They are lined up and will start coming fast and furious, shortly… Meanwhile, in the process of streamlining the pipeline and revisiting some of the more recent ones, I still find valuable information buried halfway down a 10,000-word post that I’d like positioned closer to the top.

I do keep my “ear to the ground” (actually to the on-line airwaves, and some telephonic) in ongoing developments within the family courts and beyond, and have a sense of what mainstream media is UNlikely to ever report, and too few private bloggers (it would seem) are reporting, in part because it takes more sustained attention to understand. In the light of current events, I decided to still take material from a two-year-old post to speak and teach about what I’m seeing in ever-accelerating, and unobstructed (because it seems largely unnoticed!) action.

[First post was not most recent version.  This one, similar, has a few more paragraphs in the Intro, bring it to just over  4,000 words. Feb. 22, 2pm PST/LGH]

So, this post is just over 4,000 words and lifted (verbatim, below this introduction, I’ll indicate the dividing line between intro and re-post) from about half of my 2/25/2014 post “The Stacked Deck, the Coups d’Etat, and the Fork in the Road,” which combined exhortation with some complex passages and quotes on consolidation of political clout, into business roundtables, about the history of CalPERS (as a major investment platform, as most institutional investment pools are), and more.

Not everyone wants to talk about all that! But we all can and should be able to talk about how public institutions — such as the California Judicial Council, with its Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC), its websites, and its linked referrals from that website — are becoming turnstiles to the private-industry (often, nonprofit) outsourcing of government functions, and how this process only encourages the development and expansion of the PRIVATE sector setting up shop in PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS, by coordinated agreement that the public, half or more of the time, had little awareness of, and next to no participation in, into force-fed (court-ordered and court-website-advertised) consumption of services.

It is hard not to consent to things about which one is not fully conscious. That’s no secret to those who, starting (I’m learning and becoming increasingly convinced deducing from other evidence) at a minimum 100 years ago, at least by 1913, met privately in specific places and institutions, to plan in advance. Look at the major turning points and changes within US history, and on what did events and by what authorities, Presidential or Congressional, did they seem to hinge? I will be blogging on this in 2016 also…

So long as the public doesn’t figure out the basic power schematics (i.e., blueprints), we will continue being stripped down, outsourced, and at points determined no longer-exploitable, etc.

SPEAKING OF “BLUEPRINTS”: One clue, I should say, is the habit of using the term “Blueprint” or “Models” in talking about externally-planned system changes to government operations. Whatever happened to the concept of grassroots anything? What, exactly, is the relationship of those funding the debt to having any say in what blueprints are applied to their lives, remotely assembled and coordinated?

That’s INCREMENTAL, DELIBERATE, PRIVATIZATION/STANDARDIZATION of government (across jurisdictional lines):

This thinking (devising blueprints, models to apply nationally, etc.) obviously resembles more the corporate world than what we might like to think still exists of individuals having a voice in the institutions affecting their lives, as expressed primarily through state-legistlatures, i.e., the states where those same individuals pay, “through the nose,” DMV fees to drive, State (and other) taxes, Fees to get married, get divorced, file anything in court (unless waived), and in which they have to declare residency, and depending on which state, varying prices for gas, real estate, or potentially even (see “Flint, Michigan” recently) safe drinking water, let alone schools.

In fact, one of my draft posts “in the pipeline” (from early January, 2016), in stunned awareness, I had to introduce almost as a joke: “A Judge, a Lawyer and a Psychotherapist walk into a bar…”.. (for that particular blueprint, those professions were actually involved — but on closer scrutiny, the judge [as I recall] acknowledged the inspiration from a judicial membership association ((and HHS grantee, and key player in (Years 2000-2008) “The Greenbook Initiative”)) based at University of Nevada-Reno. This, so far, is the title:

Miami Child Well-Being Court(tm) Model, with its roots in “NCJFCJ” (also tm), part of the HHS-dedicated DV Cartel”

(My use of the word “DV cartel” is deliberate, based on extensive lookups of nonprofit organizations and how they are networked together, and the behavior of these nonprofits over time.  The word “cartel” has a commonly understood and negative meaning and a dictionary definition, and I am using it in this sense.

People who do not read tax returns, or read ENOUGH on who is conferencing with whom about which policies (over time) may not have a basis for using this term “cartel,” but I certainly do. I am a “DV” (domestic violence) survivor and am NOT using this term in the sense that, for example, some fathers’ (or mens’) rights groups might use it simply to discredit the existence of violence towards women, or the dangers of unchecked domestic violence to society at large.  OK? And the NCJFCJ is indeed involved in said DV cartel as a policymaker, and proud of it, too.

[Link describing the “MCWB Court()” Model, found at “cap.law.harvard.edu” uploaded there looks like on 7-22-2015, but referring to a 2011 publication]<=check out the description, and fine print on who-all was involved. Hint: “RTI” is one BIG entity)(cf. “Research Triangle International” in NC). Details included:

  • Work with the Children’s Bureau T & TA Network to carve out a national learning collaborative to support effective diffusion of the Miami model and related best practices in court, child welfare, and child mental health. The collaborative will foster shared knowledge and strategies related to funding challenges, organizational barriers and solutions, and discipline‐specific leadership.

Carve out ? Effective diffusion? Sounds like a chemical experiment….The proud leadership has already determined it should be nationally diffused, overcoming funding and organizational barriers. “Parent protests” isn’t apparently on the list because the average parent may not know, in advance, what’s coming, in such situations.


The same USA public, some of which is being forced into consumption of all kinds of services (ESPECIALLY in anything related to families, children, and mental health/relationships/Behavioral modification programming), already through, for example, the long-standing Social Security Act(administered through the US HHS) and other Acts of Congress (such as the VAWA act administered through the USDOJ/OVW) has already pre-funded the establishment, “capacity-building” and maintenance of these services — encouraging a superstructure of professions, and then profession associations to keep it organized nationwide (actually, more often internationally).   The pre-funding comes simply because the public is, by and large, tagged for producing the tax revenues to keep the juices flowing through the federal agencies.

Now, consider that while these are all evolving over time, that HHS only came into being in 1980, the HHS/ACF (Administration on Children and Families) only in 1991, the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) only in 1994, and a RADICAL restructuring of the 1934 Social Security Act in 1996, labeled (that version), “PRWORA”.  All that timing, coincidence?  You think?

Now consider who is going to be taking advantage of this “macro market awareness”, and who is going to be taken advantage OF, in any equation where the one, smaller (fewer members) “sector” IS aware of the pre-funding grants streams, and the other (the public at large, generally speaking) IS NOT.  Where one realizes that the public is going to be in more significant distress through their position on the tax spectrum, and the tax-exempt organizations (which typify who business is directed to) can expand operations and public relations simply because they are operating on a different basis when it comes to funding government itself, across the system (all levels)?


The older (February 25, 2014) post, further down, simply says what I want to be talking about:

The Stacked Deck = the Racket/eering= about the FEDERAL BUDGET = about TAXES.  

Because taxes produce revenues. They are taken from some, exempted from others, enabling them to consolidate power and preserve family (private) wealth with which to influence government, and they are simply evaded by yet others —  often characterized on websites as a nonprofit or charitable organization …

and, in referencing California Judicial Council’s “CFCC” site below (main reason I copied this post to a new one), it also summarized a subset of this situation:

So, when I say, again:

For yet others, their assets (or, if they had none, children) are being stripped out simply through the family courts, conciliation courts and/or “Unified Family Courts,” with presiding judges strapped into the “AFCC*/CRC**/NACC/*** “CFCC” etc. system.

Each of those is an element in a system designed to steer and access federal money (grants, or contracts) into programs.  People involved have overlapping (vertical and horizontal) relationships among the whole.  In the above link:  Access/Visitation:  FEDERAL FUNDING (GRANTS CFDA 93.597) Social Security Law, etc.

And, just a reference (but I left most of it in the original post) to the VAST scale of wealth represented by institutional investment platforms.  I live in California and took CalPERS for an example, but quoting Walter Burien on this, as he summarizes the situation in plain terms, which I have yet to see anyone rebut based on the facts.  I have seen (and posted on) attempts to rebut based on “ad-hominem” (personality) attacks, which is perhaps an indication of a weak argument, if indeed there is an argument against the facts he presents which can be rebutted (sp?) by showing they are either (1) false or (2) irrelevant or (3) both.

(My Dec. 2012 EconomicBrain [“Cold,Hard.Fact$”] post combines several articles — I think pretty well — but see “Are You Ready for Real Change,” Jan./2012 therein, and towards the bottom):

Government has built their internal empires by and through selective presentation and utilizing taxpayer revenue systematically separated from the general purpose operating budgets to build power-bases of standing wealth outside of the “general purpose” operating funds. /// A large local government can be crying “Budget Shortfall’ under their selectively presented general purpose operating budget but upon review of the financial wealth power based funds held and “other” income, the same local government upon total and comprehensive review can be clearly in the black by millions if not billions of dollars.

There is nothing complicated here. If an individual or a government has established significant fund balances developed over decades, those funds balances are power-bases by investment that makes or breaks many individual fortunes by where those funds are invested.

If an individual or a local government thinks they can tag someone else to pay for shortfalls in other areas without tapping into their power-bases of funds under domestic and international investment management they will do so.

Read the rest of this entry »

Accounting Literacy Matters. Cause-based Literacy Doesn’t. (Spring 2010, Ellen H. Brown tangles with Walter Burien’s info, or at least tries to.) [First Published 5-3-2014].

with 3 comments

It’s July  2017, I’m about to reference this post again, so I’m cleaning up some formats, changing its basic font, and adding post title with short-links to its contents as is now my habit.  Part of this habit is also from adjustment to the blog upgrade, which has a sort of sickly-looking background color, unless changed at the top of each post, I discovered after the upgrade…(!) The post title was also incorporated into the Blog Motto on upgrade, and it gets mentioned on my top “sticky” post and related page — so I guess over time I have considered the points it’s making still vital! They show in part a lawyer’s response who became involved in pushing the “public banking” model to someone knowledgeable of the significance of CAFRs and their presentation of collective revenues and assets of government entities, etc.

On the update, re-checked the IRS and found it unusual timing that just two weeks after this “never-registered”(as a charity) Public Banking Institute based in California was first published (May 3, 2014) the IRS revoked its status (May 15, 2014), shown below.  For status to be revoked requires three years of non-filing (tax returns) let alone the requirements to file as a 501©3 within the state of California. This sends an overall message that “rules,” and laws, are for someone else, not the reform-minded…So, I posted that information too, along with the EIN# which hadn’t been shown before, I believe.

Anyhow, enjoy!   //LGH on 7-7-2017.

Accounting Literacy Matters. Cause-based Literacy Doesn’t. (Spring 2010, Ellen H. Brown tangles with Walter Burien’s info, or at least tries to.) [First Published 5-3-2014].

This blog has been sitting in draft since January. I cleaned it up, fleshed it out and am publishing. Meanwhile, I’ll be over at Cracking the Cult of the Constitution by Clint Richardson, and tell you why when I get back. Particularly on the topic “Corporations Sole.” (3 part series from August 2013).

Look for these two colors in a side-by-side column format to see the conversation that inspired this post.  I’ve added material to a middle section one day after publishing this post (added Sun. 5/4/2014) because I think it’s relevant.  Alternating color scheme (dark green/light-beige with red fonts) section is more about the particular institute set up AFTER the conversations of 2010.

I wouldn’t bother with this, or all the pretty colors, except that attempting to communicate CONCEPTS through the cognitive dissonance of people who mis-understand why “government” and its “social services” and “justice systems,” aren’t solving the problems, even when the word “problem-solving” is appended (like “problem-solving courts.”), is getting old.

Half the understanding is a matter of basic vocabulary, and paying attention to others’ speech. Here, I’m listening in. For followers who are just interested in “the courts,” — too bad. The courts are part of government, and if you don’t get that, I can’t help you. I did my part!! (see blog).

I find the colors, and the conversation, interesting.  Hope you do too — but the point isn’t this person, or that person.  The point is, how to make sound judgments (it shouldn’t take that long) and assessments when authority figures, or would-be authority figures/leaders, start talking.  And notice what happens after you do NOT get a straight answer.

Some months ago, I also got entangled with the “Web of Debt” conversation; not because of CAFRs, in particular, but because I also live in California and wanted a few answers I wasn’t seeing on the site. 

The strange response to a single comment on a blog (from someone I was a complete stranger to) led to my further inquiries about “Inquiring Systems, Inc.” and some of the issues below.  What I see is someone trying to sound more intelligent than he or she is (see below), and trying to seem more concerned about the disenfranchised 99% (us poor slobs) than the associations and behaviors would indicate.

Which one was the attorney, well keep reading.


Remember, you cannot judge a book by its cover?”
Well, you can’t judge a corporation by its website, or by what causes it’s in favor of.
Yesterday (well, about 1/23/2014), I got another good, fast, one-day lesson on the Environmental/Green Progressive/OneWorldOnePlanet (Our planet = Our Plans) movement by simply paying attention to a passing conversation, and then follow-up.
See How and When to Change, Ditch (or Track) the Conversations of Public Interest Crusades.  While the public is supposed to be entranced by their messages, networks, and international connections, we should habitually change the focus BACK to the accounting practices, and then talk about it — and with these as the subject matter.

Read the rest of this entry »

Get Real(itybloger)! — Call In, Read the Links on CAFRs, Review Regularly. (First posted Jan. 24, 2014)

with 3 comments

Post title with shortlink: Get Real(itybloger)! — Call In, Read the Links on CAFRs, Review Regularly. (First posted Jan. 24, 2014) Case-sensitive, WordPress-generated shortlink ends “-2hg.”  Just under 13,000 words.  This title with shortlink added during blog update Jan. 2018.

– – –

The “CAFR” topic is a governmental accounting and reporting practice which affects all people (and particularly in this situation, all US Citizens) because of its impact on the economy and our understanding of the size and scope of government operations. It is an over-arching and underlying issue, but it has been a hidden issue.

For example, as Carl Herman (Harvard Economics grad) put this in 2012, a very good question in my opinion.  Once certain evidence IS posted, it requires an review of reasoning built on “the big picture” (not including that evidence), and that “big picture” includes the hot topic of “DEFICIT.”

This is a “README” article! // Let’s Get Honest

CAFR summary: if $600B ‘fund’ can’t fund $27B pension, $16B budget deficit, why have it?(Posted on June 18, 2012 by Carl Herman in ‘Washington’s Blog”),

. . . Governor Brown is silent about the $600 billion in surplus cash and investments, claiming the $16 billion budget deficit can only be addressed by austerity – massive funding cuts to our essential infrastructure. A 2.8% divestment of the fund would cover the $16 billion deficit.
Read the rest of this entry »

Profits and Pitfalls of Intergenerational, Family-Controlled Public Corporations (K-V Pharmaceuticals)

with one comment

It started here, piddling around* on the —

Business Entities
Then, clicked on “Disclosures search”
Publicly Traded Disclosure Search (California)

*for “piddling around,” that’s part of how I learn. A synonym is “checking this database again,” and the general interest was, how large a sector, really, is involved in public-traded companies in my state? (I’ve spent so much in the nonprofit sector, and how they work in)… It’s a mindset. There is a way to search “All Companies” at the bottom of one of their screens. I found this, looked at it, picked out one, picked out a director’s name, and took off from there.

These are organizations that sell their stock, and are under the SEC regulation. As the public, we get to know what their officers are making, if they’ve in any legal or criminal proceedings (it happens), and in general, take a look at how another half (so to speak) does business, inbetween listening to how those who run the welfare system want believe is a better way to live.

The coincidental find was just too danged interesting, not to report — and again shows how deeply entrenched the pharmaceutical industry HAS to be with government if they want to do business. HOWEVER, this post is close to simply my reading notes; and general FYI info. …WYSIWYG…

I do think about this, after two decades of fighting the same issues (essentially) with the same people, plus some (essentially), when in truth, I’d just rather be working – than listening to people trying the guilt trip on my failure to work around the aggressions, or seek out how to keep or reconnect one basic service or another — like phone, internet, transportation, or to hold it together to get food, barring the ability to (who does this anymore?) raise my own.

I can see that the discrepancy between wage-working public and those running public-traded companies, especially in the Pharmacy business, is pretty remarkable. Pushing drugs via Medicaid or Medicare can be risky, if you have a crook at the top.

My search was so unbelievably random — I just happened to start looking at the list of public traded companies (in California). There are over 13,000 of them.

Preamble (Ramble)

If you don’t like these, just scroll down and read the articles, and the public disclosures.

I found this shed some light on the preachy tone of Congress on how they should centralize operations to better lift the poor out of poverty. Is that how THEY make their wealth?

This ENTIRE conversation is shown in its true colors if one begins to examine the people studying the poor — and contrast how they make their living (which is, off the poor, or studying them in institutions funded by corporations that made their wealth, originally, HOW???…. Ford, Rockefeller, Carnegie, …. HOW??? And closely controlled it thereafter…

The fact is — the general idea is to keep a handy source of low-wage laborers and substandard (at least when compared to the schools of the elite), conditioned to understand their lot in life (competing with overseas), remembering how great America is, while convincing the same masses to give up more and more liberty for less and less “ROI” on the same.

Read the rest of this entry »

Independence Entails Investigation (links-only version of last post)

leave a comment »

Well, ALMOST only . . . .

This should be a more useful format:

PEOPLE/BLOGGERS I QUOTED.  Some are notables, others are notable simply for what they noticed:

  • vidrebel.wordpress.com,blogger is “horse237”
    • “The bankers want America to lose World War III so the soon to be impoverished citizens cannot demand both the arrest of the bankers and the return of the tens of trillions they stole. They also want to fold a weakened America as a destroyed and failed state into the New World Order with all power securely in the hands of multi-billionaires.”
      (horse237’s signature block:) I have decided to share two of the visions I had as a child. When I was eight, I had a vision of a future war that killed 99.5% of the world’s population. When I was 16 and living in the projects, I had a vision of my future. I was to live in complete obscurity until it came time to stop WW III. When I was about ten, I had read a bio of Nikita Khrushchev which said he survived Stalin by playing the bumbling fool an old Russian peasant trick. I decided to do the same as I had already learned that we did not live in a democracy. The other vision I had when I was in third grade was of the Mind of God and how it interacted in the creation of the world we see. I believe you and I were born at this time precisely so we would have an opportunity to stop this war. As for my personal info, I grew up on military bases and in housing projects. My legs atrophied from starvation as a child. My second step-father died in prison. I used to have to rub my skin to simulate human contact. They did not feed me when I was a child. I do not fight in their wars as an adult.


Over the years, I have gradually come to understand that some of the wisest people, and real fighters for the truth, are those who endured significant child abuse, including not being fed enough.   Long-term child abuse will turn a person either into a coward, or a fighter.  I have two in my personal acquaintance (presently), and either of them alone is worth three on-line support groups and those who support during abuse — but will not or cannot do anything to stop it.

Writers that come to mind in this category (in my book), include Viktor Frankl, and Richard Rhodes.  You’d be surprised.

the comments on “vidrebel” are also interesting. Which led to some of this:

  • Michael Hudson, economist (Wikipedia) An author cited by a blogger
  • http://www.wanttoknow.info/(this site was from a comment on the vidrebel.**chart below.
  • Catherine Austin Fitts.  Now, her name is all over the internet, so google it. (and a comment to previous post has a video link of her).
  • Johnnypumphandle.com” re: the 1999 Child Support issue.  Link to face-sheet and summary of Silva v. Garcetti; excerpt:

. . .4. In fiscal year 1997-98 the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office collected approximately $257 million in child support payments. The cost to the public for such collections in fiscal year 1997-98 was approximately $104,809,000.00, or approximately $.40 for every dollar collected.

5. As of the present time, neither the United States government, the state of California, nor the County of Los Angeles have taken any action requiring the District Attorney to disburse the monies on “hold”. This failure is causing the taxpayers, the recipients of the child support, the welfare system, and the payors of child support to suffer hardship on a daily basis.

I also hadn’t known this about the John Silva Case, but apparently his child support order pre-dates welfare reform (of 1996) and the block grants to the states — which allowed for huge diversions from the actual children into programming based on social science (marriage/fatherhood/abstinence, etc.) theory:

6. Plaintiff JOHN R. SILVA is a citizen of California and a resident of the County of Los Angeles. Plaintiff has filed state tax returns and has paid taxes in the County of Los Angeles for the past five years. Plaintiff has paid child support payments to the Court Trustee pursuant to a court order dated November 29, 1989, commencing at such tine as his former wife received Aid for Dependent children (“AFDC”} payments for the six-month period of time from August 1989 through February 1990. Such child support payments by Plaintiff were $135.00 per month, plus a 2% service charge of $2.70, for a total monthly payment of $137.70.

7. plaintiff brings this suit as a party acting for the interests of himself and all taxpayer contributors to the County of Los Angeles District Attorney’s Office Bureau of Family Support, child Support Collections Fund, as paid to the Court Trustee or such other person ordered by the court.

Interesting, that this major Silva case comes from a father who let his wife go on AFDC briefly — and for such a minimal (even in 1989) monthly amount — $137?  She was working FT, or what?  So, around 1999, California was (belatedly) switching over to state-wide centralized agency from the DA’s offices, which hasn’t done much better, from what I can tell. they did, however, contract out with Iron Mountain (data storage) who claims it (or one of it’s partners) somehow lost in transit from Denver (what was it doing in Denver to start with?) 800,000 records’ privacy…

(On reading this account, I”m going to post it next; if one multiplies HOW MANY fathers (and mothers) are being treated this way by the same system, I believe it will add up to justify my proposal that OCSE be eliminated.  Clearly, when money OR services are transmitted from one party to another by way of government of various levels (county, state, federal) — “a lot gets lost” in the translation!

Read the rest of this entry »

Governments are Corporations. And a Budget is Only a Fraction of their Story…

with one comment

Unbelievable….  I have only been looking at some of this for about two days, but because of certain other background, I know it’s  — sensible.

I’m not even going to bother much of an introduction.  This post consists of three articles on the topic — the top one (in a frame) is from 2012, in response, I believe to California having “discovered” $54 million in a special fund after it had threatened to close the parks.  The people who responded to the appeal and donated to keep parks open, want their money back.  The next is 1999 (WorldNetDaily) and I believe the last is from 2000 (also WorldNetDaily).  I am posting them to put some concepts in our // the blogosphere’s head.

LOOK — I blogged AFCC pretty hard (not only me, but I worked at it) and to go to TAGGS.hhs.gov (not that it’s accurate, but it’s an indicator) and to look up tax returns on court-referred nonprofits, and I got as far as, the Income Tax is the problem, creating a dual-class society.

This just takes it up a step:  Enjoy!  

I am sitting here also reflecting on the past years of my life when I was trying to get back in the system, i.e., Dammit, let me back in the workforce, and cut this custody/child support racket.  I didn’t realize at that time that my primary value was not as a worker, but as a breeder for a little social security # (actually, more than one).  Apparently they can be used multiple times from multiple funds….

There are times I’ve been hungry — and close to homeless, or (more often — and to this date) been extorted with the threat of homelessness over the issues of protesting simple matters, and to silence speaking up on it.  Over time (in my microcosm) I came to realize this was about money only (for some) and kids, secondarily.   NOW, I don’t even want back on the system — or to “feed it” any of what remains of my life energies.

Put this together with other material, and it does start to come together, i.e., citizenship in the United States is a contract.  The United States (as we now interact with it, not as we mythologize it) is a corporation.  A very, very large one.

Wars take money, raising money causes debt; after the war, a bankruptcy gets filed causing corporate restructure, while all of us are kind of told nothing has significantly changed — think about 1776, and believe that it’s still that same old USA. . . . .

I’ll shut up.  Just put some of this in your pipe and smoke it – and this ain’t weed:**

**(note:  non-user).

INTRO from “BIO” of Mr. Burien:  Pretty much after this, the blog is not my writing — sources are the links.  Cut and paste, you know how that goes!

 The blackout though from the syndicated media, controlled education, and both primary political parties continues and is diligently enforced due to the symbiotic relationship for the use of the massive wealth  / investment capital involved within the structure of the CAFR. They do what they do due to the money and control involved. Nothing more and nothing less..

Collective government in the USA owns and controls more than any of us knew. Collective totals of investment, gross income, and standing wealth local and Federal government secures, holds, and generates each year is substantially greater than the same from the entire private sector in the USA. Or in other words as Mr. Burien puts it: Russia’s (communism’s) wet dream of the 1940s per control and ownership held by government with a capitalist / fascist twist. The big earth shaker was that two-thirds of government’s gross income was from non-tax sources. Collective standing investment totals held “internationally” from all local and federal government entities in the USA as of 1999 of “liquid” investment assets conservatively as of 1999 exceeded 60 trillion dollars and as of 2010 within its continued growth over 100 trillion dollars has been reached. Did the public or most government employees know this? No, they did not. What about most in the financial arena? No also.. They were not intended to have a cognitive thought on this issue and great efforts were exerted by the control structure to maintain an intentional void and vacuum in the thought processes of the general population not to even think about the issue and specific data was spoon fed the viewers creating a limited view as was intended..


CAFR1 in Reply to Judge Dale’s Comments
by Walter Burien – CAFR1
05/13/12Judge Dale’s comments, even though appearing to be explaining the game going on, are misdirections away from the core reality. The points he brings up are valid but the underlying core reality is left out.Yes, the dollar is a “fiat” currency as most currencies are. They are a bartering tool for HARD ASSETS. The currency has no physical value, it is what is acquired with the currency that has value and those hard assets are convertible into ANY currency or barter tool such as Swiss Frank, British Pound, Gold, or even if a farmer wishes to exchange land or crops if it can be arranged.Judge Dale gives the view of the “curtain” in front of the “Wizard” and at the same time creates a 100% void of the aspect of the Wizard’s actions behind the curtain. The following paragraph pulls back the curtain and qualifies what the Wizard has done here:** The wizard utilizes that fiat currency bartered over the decades for exchange to buy up all of the assets both domestically and globally. Land; buildings; developments; corporations; debt instruments, etc. And said here again, these hard assets can be exchanged for “ANY” bartering tool used globally; dollars, Chinese Yuan, Gold, promissory notes, Mexican Peso, etc. So the issue is not the bartering tool being used, but what is happening with all of the “hard assets” being acquired over the decades. I note the peoples productivity value is also a hard asset being that it is drained from them and then used  to acquire other hard assets.


‘Trillions of dollars hidden,’ finance crusader charges

Published: 06/14/1999 at 1:00 AM in World Net Daily, by Sarah Foster:

All levels of government conceal the existence of these vast sums of
money by keeping and filing what amounts to two sets of financial books
– one for the general public, which shows a very limited revenue
stream, and the second, for political insiders, bond brokers, investors
and the like, which reveals the money hoards and gives an accurate
account of a government’s income.

There’s enough money in these hoards — largely the result of
aggressive investing on the part of government — to pay off the $5.6
trillion national debt and the accumulated state and local debt many
times over, plus cut everyone’s taxes for years to come, according to
Walter Burien, a former Wall Street commodities trader, whose
revelations — on talk radio and the Internet — about government
finance practices have sparked a nationwide firestorm of public outrage
over an arcane, hitherto all-but-ignored subject.

The first set of government books, the budget, projects the flow of
tax money into the general fund for the coming year and directs how it
will be spent. The second is the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report
(CAFR), and not one City Hall watcher in a thousand has ever heard of

“Everyone knows about budgets,” says Burien. “Politicians use the
budget to ask for more money, to try and show that a city or county is
poorer than it is. They’re playing the public for dupes on the budgetary
basis — that is, they only mention the budgetary basis and never
mention the comprehensive annual report that’s the real set of books.”

CAFRs (pronounced “cay-fers”) are financial documents that show,
among other things, the balances of all the funds for a given entity –
e.g., city, a county, school board. CAFRs, says Burien, report a
government’s total income, which is exponentially greater — millions
and even billions of dollars greater — than is shown by the budget.

Burien is essentially charging that many, if not all, governments,
from the lowliest water district to the state legislature to Congress
are significantly underreporting their incomes and overcharging for
their services — and nobody’s calling them on it. The press won’t, he
says, because they’re part of the cover-up.

But is he right?

Reached by telephone at his Arizona home, Burien described how in
1989 he came face to face with a CAFR for the first time. At the time he
had just helped set up a tax protest group called Hands Across New
Jersey, the state in which he was living.

“A governor — Jim Florio — had just been elected on an anti-tax
platform,” said Burien, “but as soon as he gets into office there’s a
$2.2 billion tax increase — the largest in the state’s history — and
the proverbial whatever hit the fan. One local radio station was doing
some rabble rousing and asking people to call in with examples of waste
in government spending. Most examples involved $5,000, $15,000. The
highest was $85,000. And the callers were all furious and foaming at the
mouth at these examples.”

Aware that the state of New Jersey handles billions of dollars,
Burien figured that if there were any waste it would be in the millions,
not thousands, of dollars. He checked the state Annual Budget Report,
which showed the costs of all services to be $17 billion, with the “net
available” (for paying bills) at $24.6 billion.

“Then I asked the question the IRS asks, where are the cash gross
receipts? I added up to at least $44 billion for annual income.”

Burien noticed that certain state agencies — the so-called profit
centers — like the New Jersey Turnpike and the Newark Port Authority
weren’t mentioned, and he called the Office of the Budget for more
information. Posing as a low-level bureaucrat, he said he was preparing
a report for the director and needed figures on the autonomous agency
accounts, interest accounts and investment accounts.

“Oh, you need the comprehensive annual financial report,” he was

“Bingo! That’s the first time I had heard of that,” said Burien,
emphasizing that he had been involved with finances and accounting for
years and knew his way around state and local government agencies — yet
had never heard of a such a report. He arranged for one to be sent to

A self-described “bottom-line kind of guy,” Burien “crunched” some
numbers and came up with some astonishing figures.

“Are you ready for this?” he asked. “Here’s the statement of the
service budget — $17 billion. Yet they brought in $86.799 billion for
the year. New Jersey was charging $87 billion and providing $17 billion
in public services.”

Worse, the CAFR for the fiscal year showed New Jersey had liquid
investment funds of $188 billion; common stocks worth $70 billion; $10
billion due from loans to public and private corporations; and $14
billion in insurance company equity participation. New Jersey, which
claimed less than $25 million in annual income on its budget, was
sitting on $300 billion in cash, stocks, loans and insurance equity,
according to the CAFR.

“On that day, I learned the definition of syndicated organized
crime,” he said. “There was a real scam going on. Costs and expenses for
public services were reported on the budget where taxes and fees paid
100 percent of the bill for the services. Which in New Jersey that year
was $17 billion.

“But, whenever there was a profit center — like the turnpike or the
Port Authority — that generated non-tax revenue, the legislature had
restricted that income from being reported in the budget. Income from
the profit centers was shown only on the CAFR.”

Having heard the wake-up call, Burien today is a man with a mission.
He has been on numerous talk shows. As a result the Internet is humming
with e-mails and reports by activists across the country swapping horror
stories about similar discoveries of hoards of money squirreled away in
obscure fund accounts by “servants of the people” at City Hall . . .

NOTE — there is more to this article, and other points of view or explanations of CAFRs which are worth reading.  About now, my mind — which usually does OK processing basic concepts, and often new concepts — is having a bit of a rough time trying to grasp the significance of this,  let alone application to real-time decision making.  Please note – 1999 was a very long time ago.  However, I believe burien’s basic analysis makes sense, which is found over at CAFR1.com:

_ _ _ Another similar article, in interview format — this is with Geoff Metcalf, found at WND (a conservative site):

Date is August, 2000:  http://www.wnd.com/2000/08/6265/  “THE GOVERNMENT’S SECRET TRILLIONS.”

Metcalf’s daily radio show can be heard on
TalkNetDaily weekdays from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. Eastern time.

Question: For those who do not already know the story, how did you ever find out about these Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports?

Answer: About 10 years ago, I had been a commodities broker on Wall Street for 15 years. I was one of the first tenants in the World Trade Center. I did an international newsline coast to coast on commodities. I thought I knew what was going on; I thought I was one of those sharp little crackers. I always thought government was maybe hiding 5 to 10 percent maximum of the revenue and not reporting it to the public.

{{then he goes into the situation in NJ and new governor, see above)}}

I have ONE thing to say.  You have to start reading this — and understanding it.  If I can understand it, you can understand it.  Period.  If you can’t understand it here, find somewhere else in which to understand it.  Sorry about my formatting — but, then go get this understanding on a website whose formatting you like better.  And when the local government (which is a corporation) tells you they’re broke, you’ll know — as I pretty well began to understand about a year ago — they’re simply lying.  Oh, not everyone in gov’t may know — but the fact is:  it’s a Goddamn lie.  See Silva v. Garcetti for just a sample, just in one timeframe.

I got it that Friday and started crunching numbers. Here’s a state with a declared service budget of $17 billion showing a net available on their budget report of $24 billion. The year’s totals on the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report: $188 billion.

Q: $188 billion!?

A: Correct. Investment funds, assets and so forth. The income I started looking for was total cash gross receipts — the number one item the IRS asks you for in an audit.

Q: Would this be interest on investments?

A: Total income. Whether it be cash collected by state agencies, federal grants, the whole nine yards — total income. I found it on page 174 of the 1989 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report under cash additions. Here’s a state with a declared service budget of $17 billion that was bringing in, “in cash,” $86,799,000,000. I learned the definition of syndicated organized crime on the spot and the principle of operation. Anything that was a cost and an expense, an outright cost on a budgetary basis, the public footed 100 percent of the bill for 100 percent of the services. Anything that was a substantial profit center was totally restricted by statute from inclusion whatsoever with the budgetary basis.

Q: This is above and beyond the off-budget stuff.

A: Whenever you hear the word “off-budget,” that is something that is inclusive in the budget. When you look at the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, you will see complete separate areas totally restricted by statute for inclusion with the budgetary basis. A lot of people would refer to it as “two sets of books,” although it’s not exactly two sets of books. The budget report is in one book, and the Consolidated Annual Financial Report is THE book, the showing of the complete pizza pie.

Q: There are two things I want us to make real clear. You conducted your investigation in New Jersey. But this is not unique to New Jersey.

A: I’m going back 10 years. When I found out about New Jersey, especially when I found out they had approximately $80 billion in common-stock ownership, as a commodity trading adviser …

Q: You wanted them as a client.

A: That was actually true to a certain extent. But I was mad more than I was greedy. I said, “How could I have not heard of this?” Here’s New Jersey holding $80 billion in common stock. I was a commodity-trading adviser. I dealt with a lot of the CEOs of some of the major investment firms and I never heard it mentioned — in any circles. I found out when I called the mailroom of the Department of Treasury for New Jersey. It was sent out to every editor of every paper up and down the East Coast. It was sent to the directors and CEOs of ABC, CBS, NBC and CNN. And now I’m getting mad. I was seeing a cooperative effort at non-disclosure and it wasn’t as if it was just created that year and the word hadn’t gotten around.

Q: This Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, is it just a stack of numbers or is it something that has an executive summary and can actually be read and understood?

A: The CAFR is set up to be a simple, quick evaluation book to show: total income, total assets, total investments, total net worth. What’s been going on in this country for the last 65 years is government will always focus the public’s attention — intentionally so — on the budgetary basis of the budget report. And the only thing the budget report is, is their annual operating expenses.

Q: Give me an example.

A: Say it cost us $30,000 a year to maintain our house. Say our salary or income was $100,000 a year and we had a million dollars in investments, and say our total net worth was $3 million. What if we talked about our $30,000 budget as being our net worth? It would be ludicrous.

Q: So this is an intentional scam?

A: You’ve had a shell game played on the public where governments are constantly talking their budget, their budget, their budget. They just happen to leave out the decades and decades and decades of investment wealth that has been building up, the decades and decades and decades of enterprise and venture projects they have created separate from the budgetary basis.

Q: Just how ubiquitous are these Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports?

A: The Comprehensive Annual Financial Report was created by a group called Government Financial Officers Association in 1946. It was a program created to standardize accounting in all local governments so the federal government could easily see what the true picture was. In 1981, the federal government mandated that all local governments prepare a CAFR or, in the alternative, a combined financial statement. To qualify this, there are over 54,000 separate corporations within local government.

Q: What kind of corporations are you talking about?

A: A city is a corporation; a state is a corporation; a school district is a corporation. Each is filing their own separate report, each with their own investments. I’ve had a lot of people looking at their state reports. They see the tens of billions of dollars they never knew existed — and they are floored. Then I bring to their attention: “You’re just looking at the state report.”

Q: Give us an example.

A: I’ll use the state of Washington as an example. It lists $64 billion in liquid investment funds. Now the state of Washington has 2,300 separate local government corporations filing their own separate reports: cities, counties, school districts, authorities. You have 2,300 other reports.

%d bloggers like this: