The Daily Paul has been archived. Please see the continuation of the Daily Paul at Popular

Thank you for a great ride, and for 8 years of support!
12 votes

Was JFK Really Taking on the Fed? Pro and Con.

Perhaps someone can explain this. "Debunkers" say that he was actually retiring silver certificates, but many truth advocates say that he threatened the Fed by allowing the Treasury to print a metal-backed note. I am hoping someone can boil it down so we can see if this was one of the reaons he was murdered. It is a complicated issue and I am having trouble deciding who is right.

Not that it is necessary to show a motive for a conspiracy. Pulling out of Vietnam and detente with Russia would have been enough.

Pro (well-known essay, JFK was challenging the Fed):

'When President John Fitzgerald Kennedy - the author of Profiles in Courage -signed this Order, it returned to the federal government, specifically the Treasury Department, the Constitutional power to create and issue currency -money - without going through the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank. President Kennedy's Executive Order 11110 [the full text is displayed further below] gave the Treasury Department the explicit authority: "to issue silver certificates against any silver bullion, silver, or standard silver dollars in the Treasury." This means that for every ounce of silver in the U.S. Treasury's vault, the government could introduce new money into circulation based on the silver bullion physically held there."

Con (Wiki entry on Executive Order 11110):

"A 2010 article in Research magazine discussing various controversies surrounding the Federal Reserve stated that "the wildest accusation against the Fed is that it was involved in Kennedy's assassination."[16] Critics of the theory note that Kennedy called for and signed legislation phasing out Silver Certificates in favor of Federal Reserve Notes, thereby enhancing the power of the Federal Reserve; and that Executive Order 11110 was a technicality that only delegated existing presidential powers to the Secretary of the Treasury for administrative convenience during a period of transition."


Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Lincoln may or may not have been assassinated over the...

"Greenback" issue. However, several pages of John Wilkes Booth's diary were torn out and rumors have abounded for over a century that the radical Republicans were behind Lincoln's assassination, William Seward, in particular.

Lincoln is just one of the presidents I mentioned. Certainly, the assassination attempts on Jackson, Garfield, McKinley, FDR, Gerald Ford and Ronald Reagan show much more convincing links to the bankers.

Republicae's picture

You would probably enjoy a

You would probably enjoy a book written, I think in the early part of the 1900s, by Otto Eisenschiml titled Why Was Lincoln Murdered? It is conjecture, but interesting.

It is an intriguing read and brings out much of what you mentioned about the Radical Republicans being behind the assassination.

Also, read The Bloodline of Tyranny, pay particular attention to the paragraphs on Garfield, from my blog:

"We are not a nation, but a union, a confederacy of equal and sovereign States" John C. Calhoun

I have spent the last few minutes doing just that.

It will take a fair amount of time to go through the sources you suggested. I will have to go to the city library to do more research, since whatever I have read on Lincoln I got there. I detested the man, for his actions during the War Against Northern Agression.

You have covered only one of the American presidents I cited. My original comment was in response to the post, not to your comments, and you came out "slugging" with condescension. I simply responded in kind.

No, I did NOT vote for Ron Paul in 1988. I only learned of him in 2007, though I have been actively involved in GOP politics since 1963.

You are the one who "broad-brushed" my response in what clearly appeared an attempt to discredit it by focusing primarily on Lincoln. You made a loose reference to Garfield, but made no mention of the assassination attempts on Andrew Jackson, William McKinley, Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman, Gerald Ford or Ronald Reagan. Why? Because I make a convincing case for banker connections to all of those, except, perhaps, Harry Truman. Even in Truman's case, Truman's daughter wrote in her diaries that the Stern Gang sent bombs to Truman's and other federal officials' government offices.

Now, you dismiss my research and assumptions. So what? I dismiss your blind faith in your "authoritative" sources, unless they happen to contain readable original documents. I believe several of the sources you have cited do just that, but only for a smattering of Lincoln's writings. It has been a few years, so I will have to re-read the works to confirm my suspicions.

Republicae's picture

I apologize for my passion,

I apologize for my passion, but I am indeed passionate about the history of our Republic, the Constitution, Money, and in particular Lincoln and his illegal, Un-Constitutional actions against this Republic of Free and Independent States.

By the way, are you a Southerner?

"We are not a nation, but a union, a confederacy of equal and sovereign States" John C. Calhoun

Republicae's picture

Below is what amounts to the

Below is what amounts to the original version of this Conspiracy Theory:

Jim Marrs. (1989). Crossfire: the Plot that Killed Kennedy, NY: Carroll & Graf Publishers

“Kennedy apparently reasoned that by returning to the Constitution, which states that only Congress shall coin and regulate money, the soaring national debt could be reduced by not paying interest to the bankers of the Federal Reserve System, who print paper money then loan it to the government at interest.” (I wonder where on earth he got the idea that JFK was thinking about this, for nowhere, absolutely nowhere in his writings, speeches or letters is this found)

"He moved in this area on June 4, 1963, by signing Executive Order 11,110 which called for the issuance of $4,292,893,815 [4.3 trillion] in United States Notes through the U.S. treasury rather than the traditional Federal Reserve System. That same day, Kennedy signed a bill changing the backing of one- and two-dollar bills from silver to gold, adding strength to the weakened U.S. currency.”

Of course, there is no mention of any of that in either EO11110 or the Legislation he signed into law that day. Nowhere in EO11110 does it call for the issuance of $4.3 Trillion in United States Notes. It did not give the Treasury any authority that it did not already have since 1862. Nor did the Legislation JFK signed that day authorize the new $1 and $2 Federal Reserve Notes to be backed by gold because the requirement, at that time, was that all Federal Reserve Notes were to be backed by 25% gold. JFK had already gotten approval from Congress to remove $5 and $10 Silver Certificates back in 1961. When he signed EO11110, that effectively set the stage for not only the removal of all United States Notes, replacing them with Federal Reserve Notes, but he also set the stage for the removal of all Silver Certificates and the eventual removal of all silver coins. LBJ continued with these policies with a Coinage Act that reduced the silver in coins from 90% down to 40% and the ultimate removal of all circulating silver.

"Kennedy's comptroller of the currency, James J. Saxon, had been at odds with the powerful Federal Reserve Board for some time, encouraging broader investment and lending powers for banks that were not part of the Federal Reserve system. Saxon also had decided that non-Reserve banks could underwrite state and local general obligation bonds, again weakening the dominant Federal Reserve banks."

Strangely enough, you will find this very except from Marr’s Book describing James J. Saxon in none other than Wikipedia. That’s one reason you can never, ever depend on Wikipedia for accurate information, it allows member to write or edit the information, whether correct or not. Now, I have read the 1961, 1962, 1963 and 1964 Annual Report of the Comptroller of the Currency, nowhere within those documents nor in any of the Letters to any Congressman or indeed to the Board of Governors of the FED do I find any place where James J. Saxon was at odds with the Federal Reserve.

You can find the original Conspiracy Theory in Jim Marrs'. (1989). Crossfire: the Plot that Killed Kennedy, NY: Carroll & Graf Publishers. Of course, strangely, this is not the only Conspiracy Theory that Marrs promotes as the reason that JFK was assassinated. He also states that JFK was assassinated for these reasons too:in Crossfire that those with motives in the murder of Kennedy were "Attorney General Robert Kennedy's attack on organized crime (Mafia motive); President Kennedy's failure to support the Cuban exiles at the Bay of Pigs (Cuban and C.I.A. motive); the 1963 Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty (military-industrial complex, or M.I.C. motive); Kennedy's plan to withdraw from Vietnam before the end of 1965 (Joint Chiefs of Staff and M.I.C. motive); Kennedy's talk about taking away the oil-depletion allowance (Texas oil men motive); Kennedy's monetary policies (international bankers motive); Kennedy's decision to drop Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson from the ticket in 1964 (L.B.J. motive) and Kennedy's active civil rights policy (Texas racist billionaires motive)."

You will also find even more exciting and titillating theories from Jim Marrs to excite even the most adept conspiratorial faithful believer, such as Alien Agenda: Investigating the Extraterrestrial Presence Among Us; Our Occulted History: Do the Global Elite Conceal Ancient Aliens?. So for all of you who want to and must believe any and everything you read, there is plenty of material to be found in the writings of Jim Marrs.

"We are not a nation, but a union, a confederacy of equal and sovereign States" John C. Calhoun

Not to be a debbie downer

but $4,292,893,815 is 4.3 billion not trillion

"Before we can ever ask how things might go wrong; we must first explain how they could ever go right"


Republicae's picture


Sorry....TYPO....LOL....I've been thinking in terms of Trillions these days with our current debt system...but the effect is the same. At that time $4.3 Billion might as well have been $4.3 Trillion...LOL

"We are not a nation, but a union, a confederacy of equal and sovereign States" John C. Calhoun

yeah it happens to all of us but

have you ever really thought at 15 trillion in gdp today and it was 750b when Regan took office, there is NO WAY that is all real....just goes to show how much they are cooking the books.

"Before we can ever ask how things might go wrong; we must first explain how they could ever go right"


Republicae's picture

We're screwed Gold, to put it

We're screwed Gold, to put it mildly.

"We are not a nation, but a union, a confederacy of equal and sovereign States" John C. Calhoun

yeah I have known this at least since 1994

I was a broker and walked away from a 6 figure income plus bonuses because I just couldn't live with myself putting people in dollar denominated assets and the rest of the world would be screwed when the dollar failed. So I walked away. But don’t feel sorry for me, I believed in the Lord and he blessed me bunches after leaving. Now I trade my own money and do pretty much anything I want.
I just never thought they would take it this far…..I thought the adults would show up sooner or later……but they haven’t….and now there is NO WAY out of this except collapse.

"Before we can ever ask how things might go wrong; we must first explain how they could ever go right"


Republicae's picture

Believe me, I completely

Believe me, I completely understand!

Gold, read my post from several years ago.

"We are not a nation, but a union, a confederacy of equal and sovereign States" John C. Calhoun

You were on top of it and saw right through it.

Do you remember when Fannie and Freddie had their accounting scandals in 2004? I thought for sure that would be the end. I always looked at those two GSE’s as quasi central banks. Lenders or last resort in the mortgage market. Well there was a meeting that took place on April 28, 2004 that basically was the reason the torch of the housing bubble was passed from the GSE’s to the Investment banks. The regulators signed off on changing the capital restriction that took the banks from being leverage about 12 to 1 to …..well Bears Stearns liquidated at 35 to 1. I never thought I would see something like that. But they had to keep the “growth” going or when the tide went out… was going to expose everyone.

"Before we can ever ask how things might go wrong; we must first explain how they could ever go right"


You sir, are the They.

You are nothing but a plant.

"But they had to keep the “growth” going or when the tide went out… was going to expose everyone."

The fact that you are soooo, supportive of the 'They' to gain credibilty is Why You Sir Are Here. Thank you Sir for spending so much time.


Time to make/assume a new account. ;)

Republicae's picture

I truly hate when people make

I truly hate when people make assumptions based on something that they obviously either misread or simply misunderstand. I have to come to the defense of Goldspan because I know exactly what he is talking about and he is correct..."They had to keep the growth going" in order to maintain the ruse. They did, in fact, do just that, until the SHTF in 2008 and it was, as Goldspan stated, EXPOSED.

If you don't understand that he was saying the whole thing was a scam from the beginning, then just don't say anything rather than make such assumptions. In fact, in order for you to understand you would have had to go back and read my post, did you do that? Did you read this posting from a couple years ago?

Perhaps you are the plant....that makes just about as much sense as saying he is a plant or I am a plant...come on...use more common sense and read what he actually said about it in the context of his comment to my previous comment.

"We are not a nation, but a union, a confederacy of equal and sovereign States" John C. Calhoun


Thanks for standing with me…..lord knows there are enough conspiracy kooks on here and this guy thinks he is the ring leader. ).. I nicknamed him Base1ass for being a bully and that has grown to Dumb1ass because he has told me everything he knows and there is no other name more appropriate. But he hates in when I call him out on being a bully and tries to copy what I say rather than any original statement or thoughts…..that why he keeps saying that I “hate “ everything or “you just can’t make this shit up”.

He stalks me because he doesn’t have anything of substance and continues to post updates of that crazy lady even after she has been totally discredited…….He doesn’t have enough intelligence to know that he should be embarrassed, God forbid you misspell a word….he act like a monkey going bat shit crazy that just discovered that the taste of what comes out…… is better than what goes in.

I ignore him now after I told him he is irrelevant (and he’s too stupid to understand this). Anyone that would enter a thread with even a morsel of common sense or logic he would bully until he was the lone fool standing in a room talking to himself.

The depth of his knowledge is James Corbett and the Money Masters video. Corbett loves Alex Jones and is quoted as saying this, He must have been so sad to here that Alex Jones is educated by David Icke……do you know about this clown……he thinks the moon is hollow and that lizard humanoids control us on earth…….you really can’t make this shit up…..and Dumb1ass is a disciple of the kook of kooks.
It’s sad because his whole world is caught up in the hate the Jewish/International banker conspiracy and that he thinks he matter, if people would just listen to him, everything would be right in the world…….and I destroyed his world so he wants revenge….but beings a cap gun to a tank battle.

"Before we can ever ask how things might go wrong; we must first explain how they could ever go right"


Republicae's picture

My problem with his comment

My problem with his comment was that he offered nothing substantial in the way of a rebuttal, he just made a comment that seemed to be completely isolated from the subject we were discussing. If he had made a coherent rebuttal based on our comments then it might be a different story, but as it was it appears imbecilic, childish and didn't accomplish or contribute anything of substance.

"We are not a nation, but a union, a confederacy of equal and sovereign States" John C. Calhoun

you got it

and his only tactic left is to you can now expect that. But just ignore him.....because it drives him crazy.

"Before we can ever ask how things might go wrong; we must first explain how they could ever go right"


Republicae's picture

Believe me, I have battled

Believe me, I have battled the best of the bullies here on the DP...I live for a good debate and if he or others simply toss out tripe I have no problem calling them on it.

"We are not a nation, but a union, a confederacy of equal and sovereign States" John C. Calhoun

You and I are cut from the same cloth

In order to get the best representation of the facts you need to read the material of the time, then look for the opposing viewpoints and put it into context of the events of the world at the time. Draw a conclusion that will possibly change as more information become available…..but never join the religion of I read this one thing therefore I know everything.

The reason I like Rothbard so much is he gives you the most information and allows you to form your own opinion. I have a saying that I like “the winners get to write the history”.

Are you a football fan? I will draw an analogy. If you watch all the football programing that is out there, all you here about is the players and then the coaches and teams…..the who’s and what they did. No show (except NFL Matchup) talks about the actually game of football…..The offensive formations, the defensive alignments, the blocking, the coverage’s….the game of football.

This is what Rothbard does for financial history (and let’s face it is there any real history without financial history). He teaches the game (so to speak) and lets you understand it…..therefore when someone brings up the international bankers, you have a context of where they fit in and how their business actually works and the context of their position in the world……you are never looking for the smoking gun, because there is no smoking gun, it’s just how the world turns. Statism is no more the smoking gun then the international bankers are……but it is the root of growth that everything bad sprouts from….therefore if you pull out the root, the State cannot grow and you eliminate the branches that grow from the State, Inflation, Crony Capitalism, intrusion in the free market, taxes and tariffs, regulation, class warfare, Warfare……all the things created by men …….and these sprouts consumes personal individual Liberty, which is really the most important thing because it was created by our Creator…….and to me it does not matter which Creator you wish to choose….that is your Liberty….and I will stand with you to defend your Liberty just as I would stand to defend you own.
Sorry got a little preachy there!!!!!

"Before we can ever ask how things might go wrong; we must first explain how they could ever go right"


Republicae's picture

Few people have knowledge of

Far from being an enemy of the FED, few people have knowledge of the cozy working-relationship that JFK formed with the FED, almost immediately upon taking office, JFK, himself, convinced the FED to sell short-term Treasuries and use the funding to purchase Long-Term bonds. It was the a tactic that was recently revived by none of than Ben Bernanke...the ole Operation Twist. It involved the auction of $6.9 Billion dollars of short-term debt and buying notes with 5 year maturities.

Indeed, if you look at the policies of JFK, he maintained a very close relationship with the FED and his policies reflect that fact. In fact, JFK essentially ended the tight fiscal policies of Eisenhower, promoting and supporting the FED in loosening monetary policy.

Additionally, few people realize that JFK was an avid supporter of the IMF and the World Bank, thus if completely defies reality to think that he would oppose the FED when his actions prove just the opposite. In his speech to the IMF, he lauded the actions of not only the IMF, but also the central banks of the world for their monetary policies.

As far as the conspiracy theory, even the newspaper articles denote the real reasons behind JFK's policies and eventually EO11110: In effect, the President wants to end silver's status as an important monetary metal and make it a freely traded commodity, like copper and soybeans. Except from the Southeast Missourian-November 28, 1961. The theory that is promoted about EO11110 just does not hold any water whatsoever, add all the other facts to the case and it falls apart completely!

EO11110 did not expand the use of silver, but diminished it's use and expanded the role of the FED to issue Federal Reserve Notes. The EO also didn't expand or issue United States Notes, in fact, it heralded the eventual demise of the United States Notes in favor of Federal Reserve Notes. There was, at that point, no reason to continue them since through EO11110, the FED was finally allowed to print and issue every single currency denomination in this country. Again, JFK was not the hero!

Add to this all the other compelling information (as seen in many posts below) that completely contradicts this conspiracy theory that it bears investigation of anyone who honestly is interested in knowing what is true from what is blatantly false. That is, after all, what anyone should want to know, even if it causes you to abandon what you once thought was true. That has happened to me more times than not, I have abandoned, over the years, various theories and scenarios that been proven false.

At one time, not too many years ago, I believed this conspiracy theory and others, the reason was because I didn't do adequate research to disprove it at the time. When I began to research the subject I was forced, by actual facts, to change my views to reflect the accurate version of history.

"We are not a nation, but a union, a confederacy of equal and sovereign States" John C. Calhoun

I've Never Looked Closely at the Influence of Joe Kennedy

JFK's father, on his son's economic policies. Joe Kennedy had a background in banking and on Wall Street. Joe made a lot of money and raised his sons to go into politics. JFK had no business, banking, or finance background. He went to college at Harvard, went into the Navy and served during WW2, and on his return was in the House for 4 year and in the Senate for 8 before becoming US president.
It seems likely that Joe Kennedy got his son's ear on issues of economics & finance, but I'll have to do more research into that for myself.

Truman was the first world leader to recognize Israel...

even though the Stern Gang tried to murder him and his own personal feelings about Jews.

JFK ordered the printing of Silver Certificates. His successor, LBJ, ended that and even removed silver from coins, a capital offense under the Coinage Act of 1792. I am unconvinced by your assertions.

Republicae's picture

No JFK never order the

No JFK never order the printing of any Silver Certificates, there is no such order. He ordered the removal of Silver Certificates in the denomination of $5 and $10 Certificates in 1961, then the removal of $1 and $2 Certificates in 1963, allowing for the FED to finally print every single denomination in Federal Reserve Notes for the first time in our history.

If you are unconvinced, just read his EO11110, as well as Public Law 88-36. If you can provide me with actual proof that JFK ordered the printing of Silver Certificates and that there were Silver Certificates printed and issued in 1963 or that any other printing of United States Notes were printed except those that the Treasury already was slated to print in regulation with the Act of 1878 that required approximately $325 Million to be in constant circulation. Those were only in $5 denominations and a few $2 Bills. By all means please prove it to the contrary. The last Silver Certificate issued was in 1957, by 1964 they were no longer redeemable in Silver.

Please, by all means, I expect you to chew before you swallow.

"We are not a nation, but a union, a confederacy of equal and sovereign States" John C. Calhoun

SteveMT's picture

No doubt the bankers took on Kennedy after his death.

Kennedy fired Dulles. Dulles was a banker as well as head of the CIA. Both of the Dulles brothers conspired to kill thousands in war. Dulles and McCloy were both bankers. Johnson put both of them on the Warren Commission for a reason.

The Brothers: John Foster Dulles, Allen Dulles, and Their Secret World War
Who Really Killed Kennedy?: 50 Years Later: Stunning New Revelations About the JFK Assassination

u go boy

Keep it up :)

SteveMT's picture

Johnson's E. O. 11130 on November 29, 1963 says it all.

The names of the people appointed by Johnson to his commission one week after the assassination read like a who's who of deceit and depravity. Were they already preselected before the assassination? Note the misspelling of "Alien" Dulles instead of Allen, a possible Freudian slip made by the wikiauthor. The text of this original E.O. can no longer be accessed on the E.O. website, so we may never know.

Executive Order 11130 of November 29, 1963
Appointing a Commission to Report Upon the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy

Pursuant to the authority vested in me as President of the United States, I hereby appoint a Commission to ascertain, evaluate, and report upon the facts relating to the assassination of the late President John F. Kennedy and the subsequent violent death of the man charged with the assassination. The Commission shall consist of—

The Chief Justice of the United States, Chairman;

Senator Richard B. Russell;

Senator John Sherman Cooper;

Congressman Hale Boggs;

Congressman Gerald R. Ford;

The Honorable Alien W. Dulles;

The Honorable John J. McCloy.

The purposes of the Commission are to examine the evidence developed by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and any additional evidence that may hereafter come to light or be uncovered by Federal or State authorities; to make such further investigation as the Commission finds desirable; to evaluate all the facts and circumstances surrounding such assassination, including the subsequent violent death of the man charged with the assassination, and to report to me its findings and conclusions.

The Commission is empowered to prescribe its own procedures and to employ such assistants as it deems necessary.

Necessary expenses of the Commission may be paid from the “Emergency Fund for the President.”

All Executive departments and agencies are directed to furnish the Commission with such facilities, services, and cooperation as it may request from time to time.

Signature of Lyndon B. Johnson
Lyndon B. Johnson
The White House,
November 29, 1963.

I will take issue to your who's who list of depravity

Richard B Russell called it for what is was a whitewash. He refused to signoff on the report and was even tricked to be on it, by none other then LBJ.

While serving on the Warren Commission, Russell repeatedly voiced suspicions that the FBI had rushed to the judgment that Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone assassin and consequently was not thoroughly investigating the assassination and appropriately following up leads. (The Commission did not have an independent staff of investigators; it relied on the FBI, the CIA, and other federal agencies to carry out investigative activities and to supply needed information.) Russell's belief that the FBI was not performing adequately has been confirmed again and again since the Warren Report was released in 1964.

"Before we can ever ask how things might go wrong; we must first explain how they could ever go right"


Maybe this had something to

Maybe this had something to do with the 'regime change' that took place:

John F. Kennedy Administration:

Letter to Israeli PM Ben-Gurion Regarding Visit to Dimona

(May 18, 1963)

"Dear Mr. Prime Minister:

"I welcome your letter of May 12 and am giving it careful study.

"Meanwhile, I have received from Ambassador Barbour a report of his conversation with you on May 14 regarding the arrangements for visiting the Dimona reactor. I should like to add some personal comments on that subject.

"I am sure you will agree that there is no more urgent business for the whole world than the control of nuclear weapons. We both recognized this when we talked together two years ago, and I emphasized it again when I met with Mrs. Meir just after Christmas. The dangers in the proliferation of national nuclear weapons systems are so obvious that I am sure I need not repeat them here.

"It is because of our preoccupation with this problem that my Government has sought to arrange with you for periodic visits to Dimona. When we spoke together in May 1961 you said that we might make whatever use we wished of the information resulting from the first visit of American scientists to Dimona and that you would agree to further visits by neutrals as well. I had assumed from Mrs. Meir's comment that there would be no problem between us on this.



Spy claims Israel assassinated JFK

Freed Israeli nuclear spy Mordechai Vanunu said in an interview published today that Israel was behind the 1963 assassination of U.S. President John F. Kennedy, prompting some Israeli officials to hope aloud the far-fetched comments will hurt Vanunu’s credibility.

Vanunu, a former nuclear technician who was recently released from Israeli prison after serving an 18-year sentence for exposing Israel’s nuclear program at Dimona to Britain’s Sunday Times, has been barred from leaving the country, talking to the media or meeting with foreigners.


Republicae's picture

It is indeed odd, that

It is indeed odd, that proponents of this Conspiracy Theory never seem to look any deeper than the EO11110, even though that alone is enough to debunk the theory, but there is a massive amount of cohobating evidence that completely, especially Public Law 88-36, and absolutely debunks this theory, if one only takes the time to do the research instead of depending on all of the various websites that promote such an obviously erroneous theory.

You see, EO11110 was a transitional Executive Order that would serve as a transitional period until the Law, Passed by Congress, could come into effect. Essentially, all EO11110 did was to allow the Treasury Secretary authorization to issue silver and silver certificates if the need arose without the direct authority of the President of the United States. Thus, the law was passed by Congress, signed by President Kennedy (strange that if he was so opposed to the FED he would not only support such a law, but promote it and then sign it after passage) and became law. This law directed that both Silver Certificates and Silver Coins would no longer be issued, along with that, the Federal Reserve was given additionally authority to issue $1 and $2 Dollar Federal Reserve Notes for the first time, ultimately the plan was to replace all United States Notes with Federal Reserve Notes. Kennedy did not oppose the Federal Reserve, but through his Executive Order and the Legislation he signed into law, he expanded the authority of the Federal Reserve.


The real heros were those that voted against Public Law 88-36, but the supporters of the FED won the day, the bill was passed into law thereby ending the last vestiges of sound money circulating in this country.

Public Law 88-36
The House of Representatives took up the President’s request early in 1963, and passed HR 5389 on April 10, 1963, by a vote of 251 to 122. The Senate passed the bill on May 23, by a vote of 68 to 10.

President Kennedy signed the bill into law on June 4, 1963 and also signed an executive order (11110) authorizing the Treasury Secretary to continue printing silver certificates and issuing silver coins if necessary during the transition period. The act, which became Public Law 88-36 (77 Stat. 54), repealed the Silver Purchase Act of 1934 and related laws, repealed a tax on silver transfers, and authorized the Federal Reserve to issue one- and two-dollar bills, in addition to the notes they were already issuing.

The Silver Purchase Act had authorized and required the Secretary Treasury to buy silver and issue silver certificates. With its repeal, the President needed to delegate to the Treasury Secretary the President’s own authority under the Agricultural Adjustment Act.

Below, you will find various articles written prior to and during the period of the passage of the Bill that JFK promoted in Congress to eliminate the use of silver to back money and to expand the role of the Federal Reserve in the issuance of Federal Reserve Notes:

1. “New Kennedy Silver Policy”. Southeast Missourian. AP: p. 8. November 28, 1961.

2. “Silver Sale by Treasury Ended; President Seeks Support Repeal”. New York Times: p. 1. November
29, 1961.

3. Economic Report of the President, p. XXIII. January 21, 1963. House document No. 28, 88th
Congress, 1st Session. U.S. Govt. Printing Office.

4. Silver Legislation, April 3, 1963, House of Representatives Report No. 183, 88th Congress, 1st

5. “Silver Act Repeal Plan Wins House Approval”. New York Times. April 11, 1963.

6. “House Passes Silver Bill By 251-122″. St. Petersburg Times. AP: p. 2A. April 11, 1963.

7. “Senate Votes End to Silver Backing”. New York Times. May 24, 1963.

8. “Senate Okays Replacement of Silver Notes”. Deseret News and Telegram. UPI: p. 2A. May 23, 1963.

9. “Kennedy Signs Silver Bill”. Spokane Daily Chronicle. AP: p. 62. June 6, 1963.

10. “Bill to Release Silver Is Signed by President”. New York Times. June 6, 1963.
Public Law 88-36, 77 Stat. 54, United States Statutes at Large, Vol. 77 (1963), p. 54, U.S. Govt.
Printing Office.

"We are not a nation, but a union, a confederacy of equal and sovereign States" John C. Calhoun

No he was retiring the silver notes to make the metal available

for coinage, perhaps $20 and $100 pieces, which would be a wonderful way for the average person to save large amounts in dollars that he could have confidence in.

You are a classic shill: stress the parts that support your case and ignore the parts which don't. I do thank you though for helping me decide whether JFK was for or against the Fed. With such fatuous and intellectually dishonest arguments as I have seen you employ, I don't need to understand all the details. Now I know he must have been against it, because the opposite of what someone says who argues the way you do must be the truth.

Release the Sandy Hook video.