Episode 507 – The Incredible TRUE Story of the Pentagon’s Missing Trillions

You know about the missing trillions, right? You know, the $2.3 trillion missing from the Pentagon’s coffers that was announced to the public on September 10, 2001, and then never mentioned again? …Of course, if that IS your understanding of the missing trillions story, then you don’t know the missing trillions story. Join James for today’s Corbett Report deep dive into the real story of the Pentagon’s missing trillions and how many trillions are missing today.

Video player not working? Use these links to watch it somewhere else!

WATCH ON:  /  /  /  / /  or DOWNLOAD THE MP4

TRANSCRIPT

JAMES CORBETT: So you think you know a lot about 9/11? All right. Pop quiz, hotshot.

Number one: when were the Pentagon’s “missing trillions” announced to the public?

Number two: did 9/11 end the missing trillions investigation?

And number three: just how many trillions went missing anyway?

If you answered: “September 10th,” “Yes,” and “2.3,” then guess what? You’re wrong.

But don’t worry, a lot of people get this wrong.

So, today let’s take a deep dive into one of the most enduring mysteries of the 9/11 false flag event: the Pentagon’s missing trillions.

CORBETT REPORT INTRO

CORBETT: Welcome back, friends. Welcome back to another edition of the Corbett Report. I’m James Corbett of corbettreport.com, coming to you, as always, from the sunny climes of Western Japan here in September of 2026 with Episode 507 of the Corbett Report podcast, “The Incredible TRUE Story of the Pentagon’s Missing Trillions.”

Now, obviously, the question of the missing trillions from the Pentagon’s coffers is an incredibly important subject, and that’s even just one particular aspect of the much wider and vastly underreported story of the 9/11 money trail. But what exactly is the relation between the missing trillions and 9/11?

And it has come to my attention that many people do not quite understand the relation between these subjects. In fact, even some people in the Corbett Report audience who would be positioned to know better, not only don’t understand, but have actively been misrepresenting my reporting on this subject that I’ve been doing for, well, the better part of two decades now.

So, let’s set that record straight today, shall we?

And I think we have to start this exploration today by starting with what I think is probably the baseline, at least for anyone who was around in the 9/11 truth movement back in the aughts. They probably know this story from a CBS News report that first aired in 2002, but made the rounds on the early web back in the 2000s.

VINCE GONZALES: […] Pentagon. The day before 9/11. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld declared war. Not on foreign terrorists…

 

DONALD RUMSFELD: The adversary’s closer to home. It’s the Pentagon bureaucracy.

 

GONZALES: He said money wasted by the military poses a serious threat.

 

RUMSFELD: In fact, it could be said it’s a matter of life and death.

 

GONZALES: Rumsfeld promised change but the next day the world changed. And in the rush to fund the war on terrorism, the war on waste seems to have been forgotten.

 

GEORGE W. BUSH: My ’03 budget calls for more than $48 billion in new defense spending.

 

GONZALES: More money for the Pentagon when its own auditors admit the military cannot account for 25 percent of what it already spends.

 

RUMSFELD: According to some estimates we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions.

 

GONZALES: $2.3 trillion with a “T.” That’s 8,000 dollars for every man, woman and child in America.

 

SOURCE: A day before 9/11 – $2.3 trillions lost by the Pentagon

CORBETT: As I say, anyone who was around in the 9/11 truth movement, say, 20 years ago, would doubtless have seen that report directly, or at least would have heard people talking about that report, including Corbett Report listeners. You will note that my earliest exploration of the 9/11 money trail back in Episode 067 of this podcast did cite that report specifically.

And if you base your understanding of the missing trillions story solely on that three minute TV soundbite report, you’re not going to have a proper overview of the subject, obviously. And I think even Vince Gonzalez would not have said that that was supposed to be a total view of the missing trillions subject.

But, unfortunately, it has been taken as such by many people. So their understanding of the missing trillions has been formed from that, and thus they believe that there was $2.3 trillion that was found missing and announced on September 10th, and then 9/11 happened and it was never talked about again.

But basically every aspect of that truncated narrative is wrong, something that you would know if you had continued following my reporting on this subject over the years.

But in case you didn’t, well, let’s fill in those blanks today, and we’re going to start with 9/11 Trillions: Follow the Money, my 2015 documentary, which still to this day, 11 years later, still stands as one of the very, very few feature-length, full, in-depth explorations of the incredibly, essentially important topic of the 9/11 money trail. And I will allow you to speculate as to why no one talks about the 9/11 money trail anymore or really ever did.

But anyway, I did. It’s called 9/11 Trillions: Follow the Money. It is a full feature-length documentary film exploring various aspects of the 9/11 money trail, including specifically the question of the missing trillions.

So, if you have watched that documentary from 11 years ago, you will know that the unaccounted-for trillions that Rumsfeld was talking about in that September 10th, 2001 press conference was not discovered on September 9th. No, this was an issue that had been known about and reported on since at least 1999. And it was, in fact, one of the issues that was brought up to Donald Rumsfeld specifically in his confirmation hearings in January of 2001—as he was being confirmed for Secretary of Defense of the George W. Bush administration—and subsequently in House Appropriations Committee hearings.

DONALD RUMSFELD: The topic today is an adversary that poses a threat, a serious threat, to the security of the United States of America. This adversary is one of the world’s last bastions of central planning. It governs by dictating five-year plans. From a single capital, it attempts to impose its demands across time zones, continents, oceans and beyond. With brutal consistency, it stifles free thought and crushes new ideas. It disrupts the defense of the United States and places the lives of men and women in uniform at risk.

 

(SOURCE: Defense Business Practices)

On September 10, 2001, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld declared a new war. Not a war on a shadowy terrorist organization in Afghanistan, or even a war on terror itself, but a war on the Pentagon itself.

DONALD RUMSFELD: The adversary is closer to home. It’s the Pentagon bureaucracy.

 

(SOURCE: Defense Business Practices)

Perhaps it is no surprise that Rumsfeld felt compelled to declare a war on the Pentagon’s bureaucracy. The issue of the Pentagon’s $2.3 trillion accounting nightmare had been dogging him since his confirmation hearings in January of 2001. Although Rumsfeld was interested in pushing forward a modernization of the military that was projected to cost an additional $50 billion in funding, that agenda was politically impossible in the face of the Department of Defense’s monumental budget problem.

SEN. BYRD: How can we seriously consider a $50 billion increase in the Defense Department budget when DoD’s own auditors—when DoD’s own auditors—say the department cannot account for $2.3 trillion in transactions in one year alone.

 

Now, my question to you is, Mr. Secretary, what do you plan to do about this?

 

DONALD RUMSFELD: Decline the nomination! (Laughs.) (Laughter.) Ah! Senator, I have heard —

 

SEN. BYRD: I don’t want to see you do that! (Laughter.)

 

SEN. LEVIN: (Sounds gavel.) We’ll stand adjourned, in that case! (Laughter.)

 

DONALD RUMSFELD: Senator, I have heard some of that and read some of that, that the department is not capable of auditing its books. It is — I was going to say “terrifying.”

 

(SOURCE: Defense Secretary Nomination Hearing Jan 11 2001)

“Terrifying” only begins to describe the problem.

The Department of Defense’s own Inspector General report for Fiscal Year 1999 noted that the Defense Finance and Accounting Service had processed $7.6 trillion of department-level accounting entries in that year. Of that amount, only $3.5 trillion could be properly accounted for. $2.3 trillion in transactions were fudged to make entries balance, run through without proper documentation, or made up entirely. The Inspector General’s office did not even examine the other $1.8 trillion in transactions because they “did not have adequate time or staff to review” them.

In 2002 one DFAS accountant blew the whistle on the problem and the cover-up that was underway to stop investigators from finding out where the money went.

VINCE GONZALES: $2.3 trillion with a “T.” That’s 8,000 dollars for every man, woman and child in America. To understand how the Pentagon can lose track of trillions, consider the case of one military accountant who tried to find out what happened to a mere $300 million.

 

JIM MINNERY: We know it’s gone, but we don’t know what they spent it on.

 

VINCE GONZALES: Jim Minnery, a former Marine turned whistleblower, is risking his job by speaking out for the first time about the millions he noticed were missing from one defense agency’s balance sheets. Minnery tried to follow the money trail, even crisscrossing the country looking for records.

 

JIM MINNERY: The director looked at me and said, “Why do you care about this stuff?” That took me aback, you know. My supervisor asked me why I care about doing a good job.

 

VINCE GONZALES: He was reassigned, and says officials then covered up the problem by just writing it off.

 

JIM MINNERY: They’ve got to cover it up.

 

(SOURCE: 9-11 Pentagon missing $2.3 trillion)

As Comptroller of the Pentagon from 2001 to 2004, Dov Zakheim was the man tasked with solving this problem.

DONALD RUMSFELD: There are all kinds of long-standing rules and regulations about what you can do and what you can’t do. I know Dr. Zakheim’s been trying to hire CPAs because the financial systems of the department are so snarled up that we can’t account for some $2.6 trillion in transactions that exist, if that’s believable. And yet we’re told that we can’t hire CPAs to help untangle it in many respects.

 

REP. LEWIS: Mr. Secretary, the first time and the last time that Dov Zackheim and I broke bread together, he told me he would have a handle on that 2.6 trillion by now. (Laughter.) But we’ll discuss that a little —

 

DONALD RUMSFELD: He’s got a handle; it’s just a little hot. (Laughter.)

 

(SOURCE: Testimony before the House Appropriations Committee: FY2002 Budget Request)

SOURCE: 9/11 Trillions: Follow the Money

CORBETT: [Sarcastically] “Ha ha ha. $2.6 trillion. Oh, whatever! He’s got a handle on it. It’s just a little hot.”

Yeah. Interesting.

So, I guess the question would be, who’s Dov Zakheim? And as I go on to report in that aforementioned 2015 documentary on 9/11 Trillions, Dov Zakheim was the head of something called SPC International, which was a subsidiary of the System Planning Corporation, which was a defense contractor, which was providing air warfare, cybersecurity, and advanced military electronics to the Department of Defense and DARPA. And specifically, SPC’s Radar Physics Laboratory had developed a remote control system for airborne vehicles that they were marketing to the Pentagon prior to 9/11.

“Nothing to see here, folks. Don’t look into the money trail at all! Nothing interesting.”

Of course, Dov Zakheim was also a signatory to the “Rebuilding America’s Defenses” PNAC document and to PNAC in general. And, as people will know, the Project for a New American Century was calling for a “new Pearl Harbor” to “rebuild America’s defenses”—as an excuse for rebuilding America’s defenses. And Rumsfeld himself—as I again go on to demonstrate in that documentary—was talking about Pearl Harbor specifically in his confirmation hearings in January of 2001, stressing Pearl Harbor, handing out copies of this book that was then popular about Pearl Harbor right before the Pearl Harbor movie came out. And then America got its “new Pearl Harbor.” Wow, what an amazing coinkydink.

As I also go on to explain: yes, of course, as you can see there from that documentary, no, the missing trillions were not discovered on September 10th. They were not announced to the public for the first time on September 10th. But, as I go on to explain, the events of 9/11 were used at least in part to continue the ongoing cover-up and obfuscation of those missing trillions.

The attack on the Pentagon struck Wedge One on the west side of the building. An office of the U.S. Army called Resource Services Washington had just moved back into Wedge One after renovations had taken place there. The office was staffed with 45 accountants, bookkeepers and budget analysts; 34 of them were killed in the attack.

 

A 2002 follow-up report from the DoD Inspector General on the missing trillions noted that a further $1.1 trillion in made up accounting entries were processed by the Pentagon in fiscal year 2000, but they did not even attempt to quantify the missing funds for 2001. The Secretary of the Army, Thomas White, later explained they were unable to produce a financial report for 2001 at all due to “the loss of financial-management personnel sustained during the Sept. 11 terrorist attack.”

 

Before becoming Secretary of the Army, Thomas White was a senior executive at Enron. Enron was one of the largest energy companies in the world, posting a $111 billion profit in 2000 before being exposed as an elaborate corporate accounting fraud in 2001. The SEC, which investigated the Enron scandal, occupied the 11th to 13th floors in World Trade Center Building 7, and their offices were destroyed on 9/11, destroying 3,000 to 4,000 documents on active investigations in the process.

 

SOURCE: 9/11 Trillions: Follow the Money

CORBETT: Alrght, as you can see there, yes, accountants and bookkeepers and budget analysts of the US Army were among those killed at the Pentagon on 9/11. That is a documented fact. And some of those people were working on at least the US Army’s share of the missing trillions. But that does not mean that those were the only people who were working on the subject of the missing trillions, obviously. But they were at least some of the people who were working on that subject.

And of course, this also ties into the Enron cover up and WTC7, etc.

Again, the question of the 9/11 money trail [is] extremely important and almost completely neglected by people claiming to be 9/11 researchers. So I hope that that will be corrected in the future.

But if you were kind of vaguely paying attention to this subject and you stopped paying attention at that point, then I guess that would be the end of the story, right? $2.3 trillion, 9/11, covered up. Oh, well, moving on. End of story, right?

Wrong.

No, of course, this was not the end of the story. It has continued for many years. So, for example, the next major update to the story occurred in 2013, when it was casually admitted that that 2.3 trillion missing dollars had ballooned to 8.5 trillion missing dollars!

REPORTER: The latest scandal to hit Washington comes from a report revealing the Pentagon “misplaced” $8.5 trillion. Military leaders have also been found ordering subordinates to doctor books to hide the missing money. This is the conclusion of a special report by Reuters.

 

One former Pentagon employee, Linda Woodford, said she spent 15 years there falsifying financial records. Woodford had a job checking Navy accounting records against figures supplied by the Treasury Department. She said money was missing from the report every month.

 

(SOURCE: $8.5 Trillion Missing From Pentagon Budget)

CORBETT: Pffff. $2.3 trillion? That’s chump change! No, by 2013 it was $8.5 trillion!

…But actually, $8.5 trillion is chump change compared to the next update. That’s right. By 2018, the number had ballooned to $21 trillion!

And we get that from an update that was done to that number after the numbers were crunched by Solari (Solari.com). Specifically, a joint investigation between Dr. Mark Skidmore of Michigan State University and Catherine Austin Fitz of Solari.com at missingmoney.solari.com found that by 2018, they were able to crunch the numbers and find $21 trillion—not “missing” from the Pentagon’s coffers, but that were unaccounted for and unaccountable, in the Pentagon’s budgets.

So back in 2018, upon the release of that new investigation, I had the chance to interview Dr. Mark Skidmore about that report and its findings.

CORBETT: So, you have arrived at this number, $21 trillion dollars, which is the sort of headline number at missingmoney.solari.com. And so this is gathered from a number of different reports that have been issued by the OIG over the years, and these are numbers that are gathered from these different reports and then added together.

 

Is there the possibility that these numbers are cumulative, or that some numbers that are reported later include some of the numbers that were reported earlier? Or these are completely separate for specific fiscal years?

 

DR. MARK SKIDMORE: Well, you know, for example, the most recent report came out for the Army [in] 2015: $6.5 trillion. And there’ll be references in the report, “Well, we had to make these adjustments to account for some prior years, but there were several years for which there were no reports.” And, you know, you go back a few years and there was another report for so many hundreds of billions here or a trillion there.

 

And so it’s not clear, right, it doesn’t make sense to me that you would issue a report for, let’s say, 2007, and then somehow in 2015 there would be a re-accumulation. I don’t think that’s what’s going on, although it’s unclear.

 

CORBETT: As so many other things in this story are unclear.

 

Alright, so let’s talk about your attempts to try to clarify this. This seems like if the Office of Inspector General is issuing these reports, then there is some public interface with this data in some way, at least through the OIG. So, they would be receptive to sharing that this data in some form with researchers like yourself?

 

SKIDMORE: Well. initially I had been interacting with somebody at the Office of the Inspector General. At one point I had a phone call with two or three people and I just was trying to get a handle on some specific questions in the report. But the people that I talked with couldn’t provide answers to those. And at some point I was referred to a communications person at the OIG who, of course, didn’t know anything specific with regard to these reports. And then at one point all of the URLs were disabled for the OIG.

 

And then at some point I had done an interview on Michigan radio regarding this question. Actually I’ve now done a couple of interviews, which I think are really useful. But they just stopped responding. You know, at one point they responded to the producer of Michigan radio and said, “Yeah, we’d be happy to provide more information.”

 

And I’ll give you three examples. Because you could read these reports and you could ask a number of different questions for different years, so I just picked the latest one, the largest one, $6.5 trillion, and I said, “Here are some examples that I don’t see how you could possibly get to.”

 

And one of them was what looked to be like an $800 billion transfer from Treasury. And I’m thinking, “$122 billion. I know how Treasury relates to the different agencies within government, whether it’s a state government or national government. In a given year, the Treasury would transfer funds over to the Army in the amount that was authorized by the governing body, which would be $122 billion. Why would you need to have a transaction of $800 billion to make an adjustment, right?”

 

And they wouldn’t provide any kind of specific answer to that question. Dave Lindorff, the author of this recent report by The Nation, actually went to Treasury and said, “What’s going on?” And Treasury just didn’t respond. So that’s one example, right? So, we don’t have an answer.

 

Another one was, there’s a $900 billion dollar adjustment for accounts payable. And so one of my questions is, well, how could you get accounts payable of $900 billion in transactions that we don’t know about? What were those for? And again, no response.

 

And you know some people have said it can be internal, right? You know, from one part of the Army to another. And so these adjustments… But why would they be unsupported? And I’ll give you another example regarding that in just a moment then Norquist provided.

 

And here’s the one that I sort of narrowed down. At one point I said, “Forget about my other questions. Here’s a question I think you could respond to easily in a day’s time. In the report there were a hundred and seventy adjustments that tallied to $2.1 trillion dollars. So, that’s a huge number, right? A trillion is a thousand billion. $2.1 trillion is bigger than the GDP of India. And it’s embodied in just 170 transactions. What in the world could that be for? Will you please just provide an addendum on your website or send me a spreadsheet so that we can all see what those adjustments were for?” And they just stopped responding to any inquiry.

 

And so I’ve been trying to pull on that string because I recognize that if you go back all these years for different parts of the DoD or HUD that no one person is going to provide an answer that would satisfy what happened to $21 trillion in transactions that are unsupported. But you could you could answer that question and I haven’t gotten an answer.

 

So, that’s the kind of interaction I’ve had with the Office of the Inspector General. I’ve talked with the Office of Management and Budget and talked with the GAO, but nobody seems to have any clarity on this. I tried to reach out to lawmakers and I get very little interest or response. So, you know, that’s the kind of thing that has happened along the way that I just I can’t make sense of.

 

And then there was a C-Span hearing with David Norquist, who’s the Comptroller of the DoD. And so this was on I think something called Metabunk, and Norquist was explaining. “Well, you know with the $6.5 trillion—” There was a lawmaker asking, “How could that possibly be?This is just crazy. And Norquist says, “Well, you know, you have the general fund ledger and then you have the property book ledger and these systems don’t talk to each other. And so, when you have something happen on the property book, you’ve got to somehow reflect that in the general fund book.” And so, let’s say you have a base closure. He says, “Well, that could be in the hundreds of billions that you’d write down on your property book and you have to reflect it over here and that’s the reason that we have $6.5—it could be hundreds of billions.”

 

Well, I read the report. So, I looked at the report and and indeed there are about a hundred and sixty billion dollars and transfers related to property transactions related to property. So that’s a huge number just for a change in the property book so—it doesn’t say what those were for!

 

But even more importantly, that’s only, you know, what, two or three percent of $6.5 trillion. There’s a whole set of transactions that are unsupported that Norquist just completely ignores and nobody asks any more questions and that’s it and that’s the explanation, right? Clearly inadequate.

 

And, you know, is he being deceptive? Did he lie? If you were in the court of law would he have lied, wellm he didn’t say something that was untrue. It was just totally incomplete.

 

SOURCE: Interview 1407 – Mark Skidmore on the Pentagon’s Missing Trillions

CORBETT: All right, that’s just a taste of my 2018 conversation with Dr. Mark Skidmore about the concept of the missing $21 trillion and the investigation that was ongoing at that time at missingmoney.solari.com. So, there’s more information there to be had if you are interested.

But wait, it gets even worse! Because shortly after that missing money investigation started to uncover the $21 trillion number, and shortly after my conversation with Dr. Mark Skidmore, a little-known advisory board issued a new federal accounting standard that went noticed by almost no one in the world that made the issue of the $21 trillion look itself like chump change. Because the new number is…

…Infinity! Or zero! Or somewhere in between. And you’re not allowed to know!

You can’t make this stuff up.

So, this all revolves around something called FASAB Statement 56 or FASAB 56, which, again, almost no one in the world was paying attention to, except for Catherine Austin Fitts and Solari.com, who, presumably as a result of all of these investigators and researchers poking their nose into the missing trillions issue, provoked this new federal accounting standard.

So if you want to know more about that, obviously, there’s more information at Solari.com. I’ll point you to a good overview of the topic called FASAB Statement 56: Understanding Government Financial Accounting Loopholes from the Solari Reports Substack from January of 2025, in which it notes that this hitherto obscure advisory board that was set up in response to the CFO, the Chief Financial Officer Act, called the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board, had released in 2018 a “Statement of Federal Financial Accounting Standards 56 (Standard 56), taking government accounting practices from laxly enforced reporting standards to a new benchmark entirely—expressly approved obfuscation of reporting and, in some cases, outright concealing financials.”

Yes, the importance of this for the question of missing trillions or quadrillions or quintillions or whatever of missing phoney, funny money from the federal budget is put into crystal clear focus by this particular, almost entirely obscure Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board and their Statement 56.

So, hopefully, again, if you are a dedicated Corbeteer, you will already know about this, because you’ll know that I’ve talked to Catherine Austin Fitts about this a couple of times.

Firstly, in September of 2019, where we talked about this FASAB 56 and how it relates to the concept of the missing $21(?) trillion dollars.

CORBETT: Catherine Austin Fitts, let’s start informing people about FASAB 56 and the completion(?) of the financial coup d’état that’s been going on for at least the past couple of decades.

 

CATHERINE AUSTIN FITTS: Right. Absolutely. There’s now $21 trillion in undocumentable adjustments that we know about. You discussed those with Dr. Skidmore. And while everyone was paying attention to—I shouldn’t say everyone—many people were paying attention to Supreme Court Justice (then nominee) Cavanaugh’s sex life, what was quietly working its way through both the White House and through the Congress was the federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board. Now that’s the federal one. And it was a policy, James, that would allow both essentially the White House and the government to take sections of 24 agencies plus another hundred and fifty federal agencies secret.

 

So, now the government is free to have secret books by a process that we’re not allowed to know and approved by people were not allowed to know. And we’re not allowed to know that they did it. So, when you look at the federal government books they’re totally meaningless.

 

And the theory is that an informal policy board can promulgate a policy approved at the at the sort of administrative level that completely overruns all the financial management laws and the US Constitution requirements on financial disclosure. So, what I did at the end of the year was I said, “It’s time to take everything—all of the documentation on 30 years of of shenanigans on the federal credit—put it in a hard copy and mail it to investors and concerned citizens all around the world.”

 

Because this is an issue—

 

What they did James—you know, when you describe the policy it sounds very obscure—what they did was they basically took the majority of the US securities market dark.

 

CORBETT: Right. Now, let’s flesh that out for people who don’t understand the significance of that. Of course, the US securities market is the underpinning, the backbone, of the entire global financial architecture as it has existed in the post-World War Two era. And the idea of taking that dark… What does that mean? Put handles on that so people can understand it.

 

FITTS: Well, I wouldn’t say it’s the underpinning, because remember, we’ve grown the the emerging market bond and stock markets significantly since 1990. They’ve really grown tremendously. But it’s still the 800-pound gorilla in the room.

 

What you’ve got is US Treasury securities and anything related to US Treasury securities are dependent on the Federal Credit, now does not have appropriate disclosure behind it. And then all the private stocks, all the private companies who are dependent on federal credit for their either contracts or a variety of different subsidy programs… So, when I say “the majority of the US securities market,” I mean all the private companies who are very dependent on the federal credit both directly and indirectly as well as Treasury bonds and all the related bonds like the Freddie, Fannie’s and the mortgage securities. So, you’re talking about a very significant portion—

 

I should also mention municipal bonds, which are heavily dependent on money coming out of the Treasury. If I go to any county—and America’s just divided into 3100 counties—there is usually fifty percent or more of the revenues in that county directly or indirectly come from the federal credit. So, we have centralized an enormous amount of the US economy and securities market running through the federal credit. And if you take that mechanism dark, it means everything in that process goes dark.

 

So, for example we have $25 trillion in US pension funds. The US pension funds are the largest investors in US Treasuries. Now, let me just walk you mechanically [through] how this works. I put a dollar into my pension fund, that’s real savings. My pension fund turns round and buys a US Treasury with that dollar. The dollar goes into Treasury. If you look at the $21 trillion missing from the federal government, let’s just postulate that that dollar leaves by some unknown mechanism out the back door. What do I, the pension fund holder, have? I’ve got a Treasury security that I’m liable for as a taxpayer. So, I’ve just converted a dollar of an asset into a dollar of liability.

 

Now, you can say to me I can’t prove that that’s happening. If you look at the refusal of the federal government to comply with the federal financial statement laws since they were promulgated in the mid ’90s, I don’t know that it’s not disappearing out the back door. We have no reliable financial statements. And, you know, when a group of people—Dr. Skidmore and myself—pressured for reliable financial statements, what we got was FASAB 56 and a government promulgation of an administrative policy that says we can keep all of our books secret.

 

Now, what that means is we’re required to pay taxes into a mechanism and they’re not required to tell us what they did with our money. I mean, that’s fascism. That is not a democracy. That’s fascism. So, what we’re watching is the conversion of the of the governance model of the United States of America into a a straight fascism system. Because, in fact, if you look at where the money’s going, those governmental operations increasingly are not run by government employees, they’re run by private corporations.

 

So, we’re basically forced by law to pay an enormous amount of taxes into this system and our pension funds and retirement funds are buying an enormous amount of these securities. The money’s going into the system, it’s going into the hands of private corporations. The assets increasingly are going into the balance sheets of private corporation and there’s no reporting back. It’s a secret. It’s a black box.

 

SOURCE: Interview 1479 – Catherine Austin Fitts Explains the Financial Coup D’état

CORBETT: Once again, that is Catherine Austin Fitts of Solari.com. And that is just a taste of our conversation from September of 2019, where she explains the financial coup d’état. So, I hope that you will follow the link from the hyperlinked transcript of today’s episode at corbettreport.com/missingtrillions to find that full conversation and also to find the follow up conversation, which I will mention now.

In November of 2019 I recorded a conversation with Catherine Austin Fitts on the topic of where the missing trillions are going, which seems a very good question to be asking in all of this.

So, I hope that at the very least today I have provided a little bit more context and detail to the missing trillions story. It is a big story, and I recognize that financials and budgets and numbers and accounting is not the sexiest side of conspiracy reality. It’s not the woo-woo explosive whatever that people love to talk about endlessly, but it is exceptionally important, I think you will grant.

So, if you are interested in this subject, once again, the complete hyperlinked transcript, everything that I’ve talked about, all of the interviews, everything I’ve shown today will be at corbettreport.com/missingtrillions.

But if you are interested in the aforementioned, 9/11 Trillions documentary, of course, that is available at corbettreport.com/911trillions. The complete hyperlinked transcript, the whole documentary, audio/video formats, as usual, is all up there for free. Or you can purchase the DVD version at NewWorldNextWeek.com to help make independent reporting like this possible.

And I hope other people who have had their whistle wetted by today’s exploration will take up the mantle and start looking at this incredibly important but oddly neglected aspect of the 9/11 mystery, the missing trillions.

And on that note, we’re going to leave today’s exploration here for today. I thank you for investing your mind time in today’s exploration. We’re going to leave today with the Interesting parting words of Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld in the infamous September 10th, 2001 press conference in which he announced his war, on bureaucracy the day before 9/11. But here’s a part of that press conference that you probably haven’t seen unless you were a Corbett Reporteer. Here it is again.

DONALD RUMSFELD: Some might ask, how in the world could the Secretary of Defense attack the Pentagon in front of its people? To them I reply, I have no desire to attack the Pentagon; I want to liberate it.

 

SOURCE: Defense Business Practices

9/11 TRILLIONS AND 9/11 WAR GAMES

Since the day of 9/11, we’ve been told what happened.

“Freedom itself is under attack!”

We’ve been told who to blame.

“The Taliban and al-Qaeda.” “Osama bin Laden.” “Terrorists in the terrorist network.” “Osama bin Laden, the leader of al-Qaeda.”

We’ve been told what to think.

“Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories concerning the attacks of September the 11th.”

But if you haven’t seen 9/11 Trillions or 9/11 War Games, you don’t know anything about 9/11.

“Some might ask, how in the world could the Secretary of Defense attack the Pentagon in front of its people?”

“We had four war games going on on September 11th.”

“$8.5 trillion.”

“The most extraordinary coincidences in the history of mankind.”

“We’ve never seen so much real-world stuff happen during an exercise.”

“It is…I was going to say, ‘terrifying.'”

9/11 Trillions and 9/11 War Games. Watch the documentaries for free online or purchase them on DVD at NewWorldNextWeek.com.