(Transcribed by TurboScribe.

ai - Go Unlimited to remove this message)

I'm Chris Pate and I am very pleased to have Karen Yudis on. Karen traveled today
during a threat of a blizzard to come up to Connecticut from Washington DC to tell
us her story. First off, Karen, thank you very much for making this effort.

Chris, thanks for having me. Well, thank you. First off, you're back in
Connecticut.

It's kind of old home week for you, isn't it? It most certainly is. I was at Yale
Law School in New Haven, Connecticut and loved every minute of it. And the first
thing I did last night was I went to Sally's.

Right. Oh, a little pizza. Wonderful.

Now, for those of you that don't know Karen, she has an incredible background and
an incredible story to tell. Let's first talk about your background in law. My
background in law is that I went to Yale Law School and graduated in 1976.

But just before that, I had gone to Holland and studied development economics at
the University of Amsterdam. The reason I did that was this was right at the time
of the Vietnam War and they were saying love it or leave it. And I was very upset
about what was going on with Vietnam.

And so I went to the University of Amsterdam and I studied economics there. And I
have been working together with all of the countries of the world, including
Holland. I've had a very special close relationship with Holland.

So that's my background. You know, it was interesting because the older I get, the
more and more I learned about the ways of the world. And Vietnam was one of those
situations where not only were we in a quagmire, but essentially we sent 50,000
people to die for absolutely no reason.

There was nothing to gain from there now, wasn't there? There was nothing to gain.
Well, the people of Vietnam are actually extremely adept. Look at what they did
during that war.

They held on and they have prevailed. And I actually had a chance inside the World
Bank to work on Vietnam. I've worked on a number of countries.

I worked on Nigeria. I worked on Yemen. I worked on Jordan.

I worked on the Philippines. And every country that I've had the privilege of
working, when I say I worked on, I just simply would go there and I would say to
all of the countries, if we can help, tell us how. And I would then do everything I
could to see whether there was a project that would make sense for that country.

But the World Bank actually has a mixed record. There are many projects where
there's no ownership. But one of the things that I learned in the process of, I was
in the World Bank Legal Department for 20 years.

One of the things that I learned was how to take direction from people and how to
convince them that I had no agenda, but their agenda and to be believable in that.
And so during the 20 year period and working on all of those different countries, I
got to know the executive directors at the World Bank and they got to know me as
somebody who was there to do their job as a lawyer at the World Bank, and that I
didn't have my own agenda at all. And so as things, the story progresses.
And you can see over the timeline, because I've testified in the European
Parliament, I've testified about the corruption that I've been reporting in the UK
Parliament. And when that happened, there was a very accurate political science
modeling tool that said that all of the corruption that I and the other
whistleblowers at the World Bank were reporting, that this corruption would end,
that all of the countries of the world would join together to fight the corruption.
And that's what the story really is.

It's a story about people joining together to fight corruption. Okay, let's now
talk about that journey. You're at the World Bank.

And what did you uncover? Was it one large layer of corruption, and then many,
let's say, minor situations? Or did the one bit of bit of undoing lead to a lot of
areas that you said, hey, this is just isn't right? Well, before I went to the
World Bank, I got the operation manual of the World Bank from a lawyer who had been
there in 1944, when the treaty for the World Bank was negotiated. His name was
Aaron Brochus, he was a Dutch lawyer. And he was 80.

When I got to know him, he told me that when Robert McNamara came to the World
Bank, as its president, that was in 1968. And McNamara stayed there for 10 years,
that that's when the World Bank started to go really corrupt. And the thing about
the legal department is it's right in the very heart of the World Bank, because
there's the board, which consists of now it's 25.

In the beginning, it was 12 members of the board, they represent countries, and the
eight largest countries each have their own individual executive director, and the
other countries are in groups. And so what what brought what I learned from Aaron
Brochus was that when somebody from the Pentagon comes to the World Bank, as the
World Bank president, that there's no rule of law. And so when, when Paul Wolfowitz
came to the World Bank, I knew that we were in for some very difficult, heavy
sledding.

So that's, you know, that's really and what did you observe? That's, it's been
fascinating, because the layers of corruption, it's like an onion, it just kept
getting deeper and deeper. So at the very beginning, I probably never would have
started out on this journey, if I had known how deep the corruption went at the at
the time, I told you that this political science modeling tool came to the World
Bank, and it predicted that we could turn the situation around that there would be
rule of law. But it turned out that that model was used on the world at large.

And, and since the World Bank is like a microcosm, it's a model of the world, the
corruption that I was dealing with inside the World Bank was actually world
corruption. And so when I was fired illegally in 2007, and by the way, Senator
Lugar wrote three letters to the World Bank saying don't fire this lady. What I
found out at the beginning of the journey was I was doing my job as a lawyer inside
the World Bank, but I knew that there was a problem because there was Paul
Wolfowitz there.

So I wasn't I wasn't totally surprised. But it's been a very long journey. But I
can tell you and I can tell everybody listening to this video, that the chances
that this corruption ends is 90 to 95%.

Because it thrives in secrecy. And you're watching me now. It's not secret anymore.

What is going on right now with our Federal Reserve
now is that paper is paper currency never works, it
at the moment that we have the time to convert that
is exactly what what Ronald Reagan was trying to do
found out that 100% of our income taxes are leaving
note? What is going on right
always crashes. And we are just
to Treasury dollars. And this
when he did a study and he
the country and going to the
bankers.

That's what John F. Kennedy was doing. And John F. Kennedy, he had accessed the
wealth of the world and the gold that we're supposed to have. The Federal Reserve
does not have the gold that the United States is supposed to have backing its
dollar.

That gold is there, but it's not going to be backing the Federal Reserve note. And
so we have got to transition very quickly to the real currency in the United
States. And Ronald Reagan printed that currency, it's there waiting for us.

And we just simply have to exchange it very simply. And we will not have any
economic dislocation. Otherwise, you better believe this country is not going to
have any more military might.

If we stay with the Federal Reserve note, we will have lost our standing
completely. As it is right now, the Federal Reserve note is no longer what's called
international reserve currency. That means that the countries are using other
currency in their international trade.

The BRICS countries, Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, that's 25% of
trade. They're not using the dollars with their own trade. And 133 developing
countries, that's the group of 77, they've announced that they're not going to be
using dollars in their international trade.

Now, one of the things getting back to what I was doing at Yale Law School, between
my junior and senior year, I wrote a paper on how that coalition of the developing
countries called the G77 was developing. I went to the UN between my junior and
senior year at Yale, and I wrote a 200 page paper on that. I think that was also
one of the reasons I was brought to the World Bank by Ibrahim Shihada.

He was an Egyptian lawyer who had been the general counsel of OPEC. That's the
Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries. And he might have realized that I
was somebody who was very interested in the real mission of the World Bank.

Now, the World Bank has been hijacked. It's been hijacked by a group that is called
the Network of Global Corporate Control. It is a group that was studied by three
mathematicians at the Federal Institute of Technology.

And they found out that this group controls 40% of the assets of the 43,000
companies on the capital markets. And what it does is it takes the same directors
and puts them on interlocking boards. So they have 10 times their economic might.

And they didn't think anybody was going to find out about them, but we did. And
this group has come into the World Bank. And it's also come into the United States.

And it's done something called state capture. It is buying off the politicians.
What they do is they print dollars.

And they spend them to buy the politicians. They get to keep the difference between
the amount that it costs to print the dollars and the face amount of the dollar.
And then to add insult to injury, they charge us interest on country debt.

That's called usury. That means that people are working three months out of the
year to pay the bankers on a scam. They have no right to keep that seniorage.

And any president that tried to end that scam, that's what happened to Abraham
Lincoln. That's why he was shot. So any president that tried to end that scam was
sent off.
And people have said, well, Karen, if they can get rid of presidents, how come
you're still around? And the reason is, first of all, because I have just been
following the rule of law. It wasn't very easy to get rid of me. And frankly, the
problem isn't something that I've invented.

It's a real problem. So if you get rid of me, you haven't gotten rid of the
problem. You have just exposed the problem.

And they were trying to cover it up. So it wasn't going to help them. Is it safe to
say that those who stand behind all of the central banks are from the same group?
That is very safe to say yes, but it's more than the Bank for International
Settlements.

The BIS was created in 1930 for war reparations for Germany. But in the meantime,
that group didn't just come on the scene suddenly. They're in front of something
which has been going on for centuries.

If you go back and read what was going on in the Middle Ages, when we had a Dark
Ages, we are right now at the same point that we were in 400, which is when we went
into the Dark Ages, because their currency failed. But we're at a point that that
doesn't have to happen. And as a matter of fact, the chance that it doesn't happen
is 90 to 95%.

Because we know what's going on. And we're not going to let it happen. Tell my
viewers what the Federal Reserve is, how they came into this country in one of the
worst dastardly acts in the history of our country.

That was in 1913. What they did was they had a secret meeting. Griffin wrote a book
on this.

And they waited until most of the members of Congress had gone home at Christmas
time. And then they passed this legislation. And by the way, the Federal Reserve
note is unconstitutional.

Correct. And what Kennedy tried to do, and what Reagan tried to do, was to
essentially uphold the Constitution, which said what? That Congress would coin our
money, correct? So there would be some accountability to the money. Am I right?
Yes.

But it wasn't just up to Congress. The states could also issue currency in silver
and gold. That was something that they were entitled to do.

So Connecticut could have its own currency. New York could have had its own
currency. Some of the states are now recognizing precious metals as currency.

I believe five of them are doing this. Wow. So in five states, you could go in to a
store and have silver or gold and you can purchase things? I think the way they're
doing it is they're actually minting the currency in precious metals in those
countries.

But yes, I don't think you go into the store as much. But one of the things that
I've learned, if you're trying to use gold coins, that's worth a lot of money. It's
how are you going to buy your groceries with currency like that? It turns out that
you can press gold very, very thin and put it in a plastic envelope and have the
amount of gold equal to the face amount of that currency.

And so that's what countries are actually poised to do, to issue real currency,
real valuable currency where you don't have interest charged. We have a situation
in this world where I don't know how many fiat currencies there are, but
essentially they're only really worth the paper that they're printed on without the
backing of silver or gold, correct? Yes and no. Because don't forget that if
countries are responsible for repaying the debt, you've got the labor of the whole
citizenry of that country.

And what the bankers have done is they've taken the birth certificates of babies,
and they've estimated how many taxes those babies are going to be paying for in
their lifetime. And they've taken that birth certificate, and they've floated it on
the capital markets and earned money on it. So they took a shot at how much money
they thought I would make in my lifetime, because I had a social security number,
right? And they basically rolled the dice on a capital market and made money off
it.

Is that what you're telling me? A lot of money. That's right. Of every citizen that
had a social security number.

It gets much worse. Yes, not only that, but if you two citizens are married by a
justice of the peace, they're not actually married. Because the person that the
justice of peace is marrying is somebody with capital letters.

The straw man. That's right. That's right.

And without bothering to tell people and what I just found out a month ago, and
this as a lawyer was something which was, it shocked me to my very foundations.
What I found out is that the courts that we are going to are not real courts. What
the bankers have done is when you go to a bank and you sign your signature card,
there's little fine print underneath that says subject to the bank rules.

And if you read the bank rules, inside is a waiver of your right to a real court.
You have waived your right to a real court. I found this out from, there's a fellow
named George Mercier, who used to be the clerk of the courts in New York, and he
wrote a paper called Invisible Contracts.

So what I did, I sued the World Bank. I bought a World Bank bond, which meant that
I was allowed to sue the World Bank, and I sued the World Bank because its
financial statements are incorrect. I knew this because as a lawyer inside the
World Bank, when I tried to correct a project where the board was being lied to, it
was a cover up, and I tried to correct that, I was punished.

And the board was never told that they were lied to. Now that means that the
internal controls are lacking. Any accountant that tries to correct the financial
statements is going to be fired because there's no recourse as an employee.

You're not allowed to sue the World Bank. What you're allowed to do is you're
allowed to go to an internal tribunal called the Administrative Tribunal. The
judges on that tribunal are actually awarded arbitration contracts by another
branch of the World Bank called MIGA, the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency,
and also ICSID, the International Center for the Settlement of Investment Disputes.

They're given very, very lucrative arbitration contracts. So when you're an

employee who's trying to correct the records inside the World Bank that are
incorrect, you go to a kangaroo court. And so, but because I was a lawyer inside
the World Bank, I knew if I bought a World Bank bond, I could sue the World Bank in
the real courts.

And that's what I did. And I also sued the World Bank's accounting firm, KPMG. And
then I went to all of the regulatory agencies, and I went to all the attorneys
general, because they were required to protect their citizenry from inaccurate
financial statements of an issuer on the capital markets.

So I used all the securities laws, and very strange things happened with that case.
And finally, all of the executive directors and the Board of Governors, that's the
188 member countries, settled my lawsuit, and the court refused to recognize the
settlement. Now this was, I was astonished.

How could that happen? That was in 2012. And so it was kind of like a mystery novel
to find out how this could have happened. And now I found out what it is, is those
are not real judges.

They're not real courts. And what I did was I went and I spoke to the clerk of the
court, and I told them about this study that George Mercier had written about the
invisible contracts. And I said, how are we going to get this straightened out? And
the clerk said, I'd like you to file another document in the court.

So I did. Actually, I filed it in the district court, and also in the Court of
Appeals. And I found out on the 5th of January, that the judge, Judge Boasberg, had
written a memorandum opinion, ignoring the issue that I had raised.

Now that's fraud. So I went back to the court, I went to the chief judge in the
district court, Judge Roberts, and I asked him what he was going to do to correct
that situation. And he said, well, I'm not going to do anything.

So I then tried to figure out what could I do? Well, these judges that are not
sitting in real courts have security bonds issued by insurance companies, surety
bonds. So I went back to the Senate, the Senate Judiciary Committee, and I asked
them to tell me who the insurance company was so I could file for damages. Wow.

Yes? Yes. That cover these judges, is what you're saying. That's where we are.

They're covered. Oh, that's where we are right now. Well, they haven't told me who
the insurance company is.

But I did talk to the Association of Insurance Companies, and I found out that
there are 400 insurance companies that are issuing these surety bonds. So that's
where we are. So this is wonderful justice that we have in this country, isn't it?
It is a circus.

It is a three-ring circus. And this woman has taken the reins to uncover all of
these things that have been going on for many, many years. We talk about the
Federal Reserve.

We talk about what really happened to John F. Kennedy. What really happened to
Ronald Reagan? What happened to Abraham Lincoln? You know what they tried to do?
They tried to return the currency to the power of the people, which leads me to my
next question. Look into that camera, and for those people who feel that we are a
representative republic, tell them what's really going on with our congressmen and
our senators.

Well, you see, the people that gave us our constitution knew exactly what we were
up against, and so they put a hidden trap door in the constitution called Article
V. And that provides that when two-thirds of the state legislatures require there
to be a constitutional convention, there has to be one. And more than two-thirds of
the state legislatures have asked for the constitutional convention. I went to the
meeting of the state legislators that was held by the National Association of State
Legislatures, and we discussed this issue.

One of the other issues that we discussed was the United States credit rating,
because if we have all these hidden trap doors and we don't have real courts, how
can we be a country with a good standing as a country that can be relied on to
repay our obligations? But what's the reality? You just told me before we went on,
you had some updated information of what our credit rating actually is in the
world. Yes, because the credit rating agencies, I've been in touch with all of them
as this saga has played out, and they know that the citizenry of the United States
is taking back our republic, and what's happened to our real constitution is it's
been put on the back burner. In 1871, the banks came in, and that's when they
carved out the District of Columbia, and they said that there was actually a
company that was the United States of America, and the federal employees were
actually employees of that company, not civil servants.

So, when we take back our constitution, which we can do using Article V, I just
finished writing a message to some of the people that have been following me on
Twitter, and I said that we were in an interregnum. That's a situation where you
don't have a legitimate government. Our legitimate government is the government
that we the people, because that's what's in our constitution.

It begins with we the people. We're allowed to take away our consent to the
government and fix it, and that's what we have done. When our state legislatures
said that they wanted an amendment, and more than two-thirds of them said this,
that was when the Congress was required to convene a constitutional convention.

So, right now, our government is not a legal government. We the people are the ones
that are in control. We the people are the ones that can straighten things up.

And in case people are wondering what do we do, how to get from here to there, they
don't have to worry, because the founders knew that we had this difficult
situation, that we would be in a period of transition, and that's why they created
the states. And the banks knew that the states would be something that they had to
worry about. So, you know what they did? They created something called Metro 1313.

They created agencies that would undermine the states. So, we've gone back to the
county level, and they've also created an agency that was going to undermine the
counties, but there's another agency called the County Executives of America. Those
are the ones where there's 700 counties where the counties, the citizens in the
counties elect an executive, and that agency is the one that we've been dealing
with in this period where we don't have a legitimate government.

You know, it's interesting because we often think of being overtaken as what
happened on 9-11 or what happened in Vietnam or Korea, but something very important
happened in 1871, a state of emergency. Does that state of emergency still exist?
Yes, because the U.S. Congress has been extending it secretly behind closed doors
without bothering to tell us. And what is the implication of having a state of
emergency? That's how, for example, in the internet, when you send an email and it
doesn't arrive, it's gone into a hidden labyrinth somewhere and been intercepted.

That's not legal, but it's happening anyway. It's happening because of that state
of emergency. So your rights are suspended during a state of emergency.

Is it safe for me to say that individual people's rights, the rights that we think
we have, is suspended during a state of emergency time? Not only that, but when you
go to these kangaroo courts and you ask to have your constitutional rights
recognized, that judge is actually not required to do that because you've secretly,
without knowing it, waived your right to that court of equity where you could have
stood there as a human being and asserted your rights. Because when you go into
these kangaroo courts, you're actually going there not as an individual. They see
you as the corporation that they created when they took your birth certificate and
pledged it on the capital markets.
So there's all this secret, some lawyers call it gobbledygook. Many lawyers, if you
ask them about this, they can't believe it. And frankly, when I first heard about
it, it sounded so improbable that I just dismissed it out of hand.

It's just that because I had to keep getting confronted with it because people were
telling me about it, I had to go into studying the documents. And there are
actually, in the 1990s in South Carolina, a study group went back and looked at
their state house records, their governor's records. And I have the transcript of
that study group.

Yes, all of this happened. This is our actual legal situation.

(This file is longer than 30 minutes. Go Unlimited at TurboScribe.ai to transcribe

files up to 10 hours long.)