Did ECB save Deutsche Bank from Comex gold-default?
|Did ECB save Deutsche Bank from Comex gold-default?|
In a stunning article from internet news-site “Seeking Alpha”, numbers and facts revealed that without the last-minute sale of over 1 MILLION ounces of gold by the ECB, there would almost CERTAINLY have been a formal default in Comex gold futures-trading.
On March 31st, Deutsche Bank personally “delivered” over 850,000 ounces of gold. Yet even AFTER that massive delivery, there was more than 1.5 MILLION ounces of additional gold claimed by “longs” for “delivery” - that is, “long” contracts where the purchaser demanded delivery of “physical” bullion.
On the very same day where the criminal, Comex “shorts” looked like they would finally be exposed for “selling” more gold than they held, the European Central Bank suddenly decided to sell over 1 MILLION ounces of gold.
For those who would like to remain in their “cocoon” and pretend this was just a happy coincidence, consider this: only two months earlier the European Central Bank bought more than 1 million Euros of gold – at a higher price.
In a commentary I wrote on February 5th ("European Central Bank ADDS Gold, DUMPS dollars”), I pointed out how (for the first time in many years) the European Central Bank had bought gold – just as it was hitting an all-time record price (in Euros). Now, only two months later, the ECB suddenly sold one thousand times as much gold – and at a lower price.
These are the actions of a fickle, short-term trader – not a central bank. I'll take a quote from the “Seeking Alpha” article to comment on this “amazing coincidence”:
Circumstantial evidence has always been a powerful force in the law. It allows police, investigators, lawyers and judges to ferret out the truth. Circumstantial evidence is admissible in any court of law to prove a fact. It is used all the time, both when we initiate investigations, and once we seek indictments and convictions. We do this because we deal in a corrupt world, filled with suspicious actions and lies, and the circumstances are often suspicious enough to give rise to a strong inference that something is amiss. Most of the time, when the direct evidence is insufficient to prove a case beyond a reasonable doubt, or even by a preponderance of direct evidence, circumstantial evidence fills the void, and gives us the conviction. We even admit evidence of the circumstances to prove murder cases. In light of that, it certainly seems appropriate to use circumstantial evidence in evaluating possible regulatory violations. The size and timing of the delivery of Deutsche Bank’s COMEX obligation is suspicious, to say the least, when taken in conjunction with the size and timing of the ECB’s gold sale. It is circumstantial evidence that the gold used by Deutsche Bank to deliver and fulfill its COMEX obligations, came directly or indirectly, from the ECB.