Catherine Austin Fitts exposes a New York Times disinformation campaign involving Harry Reid and Leslie Kay, arguing that shifting $21 trillion from a 2.0 to a 3.0 system funds a Space Corps and multi-planetary ambitions. She claims the deep state utilizes this missing money to sustain two conflicting civilizations within one budget, suggesting only cutting off these funds resolves the crisis. While noting Alex Jones' report on Trump's audit order, Fitts warns against plagiarism by figures like Tom DeLong, framing the narrative as a deliberate effort to obscure financial manipulation driving aggressive space militarization. [Automatically generated summary]
Transcriber: CohereLabs/cohere-transcribe-03-2026, WAV2VEC2_ASR_BASE_960H, sat-12l-sm, script v26.04.01, and large-v3-turbo
Time
Text
The Decision to Be Transparent00:04:27
Hello, everyone.
This is Dark Journalist, and I'm so excited to be with you as we head into this holiday weekend.
Now, I'm working on a major overview of Control 101 Solari report and a look ahead for 2018 with former Assistant Secretary of Housing, Catherine Austin Fitz.
And as we started talking about the strange New York Times Harry Reid UFO disclosure story that's been coming out and being reported on, I realized that we should probably talk about this and get it out to everyone now.
So, here's a quick look here.
At this narrative that's been awkwardly tumbling out about UFOs.
So enjoy this little present, and subscribers will get the full overview next week.
Catherine, it's great to have you back.
Now, as we head into this holiday season, we're getting dubious trial balloons of something that has Harry Reid and the New York Times collaborating and reporting on this now defunct UFO investigation program that Harry Reid is talking about.
Now, I know you've had plenty of experience with the New York Times.
What's going on here?
Really interesting because.
When I first started to sort of get targeted by the enemy of the state process, I remember I made a decision.
I'd been burnt badly by the New York Times when I was in the Clinton administration, and the way that convinced me the New York Times was just a criminal organization.
And then I got burnt really badly by the Washington Post, same thing, criminal organization.
And I said, you know, that's it.
I am never talking to corporate media again, they are not getting one minute of my time.
I'm just going to answer people's questions.
Well, you know, 10 years later, it evolved into a legitimate business.
Right.
You know, whoever thought I would be in media was the one thing.
If you told me I had to do it, I would have said never.
So, but I said, I'm not going to waste another second of my time.
And I saw wonderful people, Gary Webb was a perfect example, who kept trying to make their way back into corporate media.
And it broke their hearts or destroyed their lives or ended up getting them killed.
And so, my, you know, sort of one of my goals in life, Daniel, is I want to have integrity.
And I want to only do business.
I've had it with trying to do business with people who don't have integrity.
And, you know, if you do what you and I do, you know, there's always somebody with no integrity who's willing to show up.
So, I think it's one of the things I'm thinking about when we look back and say, what are some of the great things that happened in 2017?
Was a dark journalist and Bill Ryan outing Corey Good.
Because, you know, It was something, all right.
It was a highlight.
It was a disinformation, it was a tsunami of disinformation that did so much harm.
And it was really funny because right after you finished, you and Bill finished sort of cleaning that one.
It was like somehow our world had a bath and we got clean again.
All of a sudden, in comes pouring Tom DeLong and the next wave.
Corey Goods.
I said it was Corey Good 2.0.
Exactly.
I thought, oh, here.
Not again.
So, you know, to me, Tom DeLong is don't worry about the $21 trillion.
They were protecting you from the aliens.
Just say thank you and move on.
Great.
Yes, exactly.
And who is breaking the story?
Our reliable friends at the New York Times, bravely taking the lead with the help of Disclosure Man himself.
No, not Tom DeLong.
Harry Reid, Mr. Nevada senator who hid Area 51 and voted six times to block an audit of the Federal Reserve.
Let's just call him Mr. Transparency for short.
And after, of course, your New York Times history, we know all about them.
I should tell you the story because that's a Roger Stone story.
You want to hear the Roger Stone story?
Oh, definitely, yes.
Okay.
I can't wait.
So I became assistant secretary in 1989, and there was a HUD scandal immediately broke because there was tremendous fraud and corruption going on at HUD all during the Iran Contra period.
And so things were very tense.
Jack Kemp was the secretary.
Lobbying and Sabotaging the Article00:05:40
And at the time, the Times had decided that it was going to write in the A section, on sort of the middle of the section, say page 10 or page 16, they were going to write in depth profiles of people who were not at the cabinet level but below the cabinet level who had significant real responsibility.
And it was a way of exploring the serious policy issues and looking at the machinery and how these things were working out.
And so they appointed the Times.
Had an investigative journalist who was extraordinary, who had covered the Department of Justice.
She broke the abscam story, and her name was Leslie.
And so she, smart as a whip, approached the Public Relations Office and said, I want to do a story on FITS because she had heard from the people at the Office of Management and Budget that what I was doing on financial reform was really exciting.
Now, I thought it was exciting, the people at OMB thought it exciting, but if you were outside of the finance and accounting area, You know, it could basically put you to sleep.
But this was a reporter who understood nuts and bolts, very smart, understood money, understood law.
Anyway, so she got in her head she wanted to write a profile.
And she calls HUD and asks for permission.
And the secretary's office says, no, no permission.
So she decides she's not going to be deterred.
She's going to do it anyway.
Okay, so she starts calling and lobbying.
And the secretary's office is trying to stop it.
The more they try and stop it, the more she's insistent we have to do it.
And finally, they say, okay, you can talk to her.
So I start to talk to her.
Well, this woman is smart as a whip, and I really enjoy talking with her.
So we start getting, you know, we start really digging in, and she had an incredible capacity to understand the complexity of all the sort of mortgage and money and mortgage fraud.
Very, very, very smart woman.
Anyway, so we're digging in and digging in, and then all of a sudden she calls me, and I know she's working on the story and close to finishing it.
She calls me, and she says, I have to ask you some questions.
You can tell she's deeply troubled.
So she asked me a series of questions, which are just complete crap.
You know, it's, and it doesn't make any sense.
I said, Where is this coming from?
And she said, Well, I don't really want to tell you, but my editor had some questions and I have to ask these questions.
And I was able to basically debunk all of it.
None of it was true.
None of it was correct.
It was messy.
It was sloppy.
It was, but what is this garbage?
So then she starts to talk to me about how the secretarial office is trying to sabotage me and I have enemies.
And I'm trying to make like, No, we're fine.
We're all good.
I'm sure you misunderstand.
But this, anyway, so this happens like three or four times when she comes back with a whole hour of this crap.
And, you know, the crap gets worse and worse and worse.
And finally, you know, I'm being accused of doing all these illegal things, which are just not true.
Anyway, and it's sloppy enough that it's pretty easy to destroy and beat back.
All right.
Well, then the next thing happens.
She writes the article.
And I now find this out later after, and I'll explain why.
The print shop from New York calls her to inform her that the Washington editor is changing things in the article under her byline without telling her.
Wow.
And inserting things that are very negative towards me.
Apparently, the story turned out to be extremely positive.
And she has to go to the editor's boss in New York.
And the resolution of this is that she resigns from the New York Times and the story is pulled.
It never runs.
And that is the only way that she can stop it from running with things being inserted which are just not true.
And to her credit, she had the integrity to do.
I mean.
So, what was it that was going on behind the scenes that made this happen?
Well, the guy who's been lobbying the editor is Roger Stone.
Fascinating.
So, Roger Stone has been making up story after story after story.
Now, the chief of staff.
To the secretary was an old Black Manafort and Stone employee.
He started out as a driver in one of the campaigns for Black Manafort and Stone.
So I'm assuming that the secretary's office was arranging for Roger Stone to destroy the story.
Oh, well, that sounds exactly right.
Anyway, so my impression, I had some other run ins with Black Manafort and Stone, but basically, if you said to me, Name the number one swamp critter in Washington, I would have said Roger Stone.
Yeah.
Yeah.
So, the idea that Roger Stone is on Alex Jones, you know, cleaning the swamp, it's like, who's doing it?
Yes, yes.
Oh, Roger Stone, freedom fighter, don't you know?
Oh, God.
You know, well, here's the thing Roger Stone, if you look at sort of the lies they were coming up with and pushing, somebody was doing a very clever job at lying and trying to sabotage the article.
The problem was, you know, that if you look at the complexity of money, real estate, mortgages, And the flow of what I was dealing with, it's a very complex flow.
And the reporter was brilliant and willing to deal with the complexity at a subatomic level.
Overt Investment in Space00:08:07
And if you're willing to go down to the subatomic level, then you have to be very precise.
The way I knew that Gary Webb had absolutely nailed the story was given what I know about government contracting, government programs, government budgets, and money, he was flawless at the subatomic level.
And there was no way, given his background, that he could.
Be that way, unless he just nailed the story and had the facts.
So, anyway, that's my one run it.
So, when Roger Stone turned up as freedom fighter, it was like, I don't think so.
Wow.
Amazing the pressure they exerted at the time to just paint this negative picture of you.
Just the ultimate and totally compromised media.
And I should say, I mean, I know Roger's gig was a kind of political hitman, and he reveled in the job.
He's from that hardball politics world all the way back to Nixon.
Uh, and so it makes things easier for us when we understand that world just a little bit better.
But this series of topics came up, and I thought it will take Catherine to figure this out.
Now, when I think of the missing money and then the weird New York Times UFO story, and then just a couple of weeks before that, of course, you mentioned the DOD audit, and a few weeks before that, Trump announces through the newly revived Space Council that we're going back to the moon.
Now, I know these things are all connected, but Catherine, can you tell us why?
Here's why.
So, so What is the financial coup?
You shift the money out of 2.0, you put it in 3.0.
Right?
Yes.
When it's in 3.0 and that's all safe and done, now you can go more public on space.
You're insourcing, you're going to build major capacity in space.
And, you know, remember the wrap up I did two years ago space, here we go.
So now you're going to make the space investment much more overt.
You can, you've got the money locked up, that's all done.
And because you're insourcing so much to North America, you can make more.
And you've got the privatization models where NASA's basically parsing money out, you know, to.
To corporate contractors.
So you have all the things in place now to make your push into space much more overt.
And they've been doing that steadily for the last two years.
You're building spaceports all over the country.
If you look, when I did the wrap up on space, here we go, we showed all the different movies, and Chanel's doing a moonwatch, and you've got the Wall Street Journal Weekly magazine, their fashion spread is at SpaceX.
Yeah.
So space.
I mean, if you read the popular science and popular mechanics, it's all space targeted at kids to try and get them to want to grow up and be robotics engineers and participate in space programs.
So, whether it's the curriculum, whether it's the fashion, whether it's the investment, big move into space.
And I think with the 2.0 to 3.0 shift done, you can be much more overt about this.
The overt investment is going to grow tremendously.
Our first quarter, we'll wrap up, will be on the space based economy.
So, our annual wrap up is pension funds, but the first quarter will be space based economy.
Terrific.
Because that's going to be one of the great primary trends of the next couple decades.
This is a major trend and something we all need to get a handle on.
Right.
We made a decision to globalize in the 90s because we wanted to build a multi planetary civilization.
That's why we did globalization as hard and fast as we did.
The goal was to build a multi planetary civilization.
And now that you have the Asian space races and the Russians developed to the point where they are.
You know, this is going to be a major push.
I mean, here's the reality.
When Trump signed the $700 billion budget authorization, it was one or two weeks ago, he announced the Space Corps.
So we're creating a new division of the military.
And this is big because remember, it was Eisenhower after Sputnik that insisted that the space go into NASA, not into the military.
So now the military finally got it back.
All right.
The Space Corps, you have a big meeting with a picture of Pence leading the space initiatives.
Who's sitting to his right?
Rex Tillerson.
Who is Rex Tillerson?
The Secretary of State.
Why do we need the Secretary of State?
Well, apparently we're going to have relations.
Right?
Yeah.
Right.
Okay, so.
That is fascinating.
Well, Catherine, you've scored amazing victories, really, lately, as we get to the end of the year here in spotlighting crucial topics.
But none more important than the missing money, which is even being picked up at this point in mainstream circles by Forbes.
I mean, just incredible.
And everyone, keep in mind this is Catherine's research.
She's been on this issue since 1997, doing the hard research.
So don't let some fly by marketing group or Tom DeLong or Harry Reid pretend they did this.
This is Catherine's work, so don't let them plagiarize it.
But Catherine, that deep state is already working on maneuvers to get around this by any means necessary.
The reason they can engage in lawlessness and criminality.
With impunity is because they have an infinite source of free money.
Yes.
So my attitude was I'm going to keep bringing up the missing money until enough people understand that there's only one way to stop this, and that's to cut off their money.
Yeah.
If you just said, okay, we're going to run the money according to what the law is, 90% of all these problems would go away.
Amazing.
You know, and then we'd be down to bickering about, you know, it'd be very small bicker.
Yes.
If we have two civilizations operating then here, how do we communicate with the other one?
If you want to deal with this problem of two civilizations in one budget, Then you've got to say to the second civilization, if you don't come clean, we're going to cut off your money.
But the players are scared to do that.
Yeah, everybody's scared because they're dangerous.
But the reality is, you know, if all of us say it one county at a time together, you know, and we do it in a positive way, not let's go kill these guys.
It's like, okay, right, yeah.
Let's come clean and move forward.
You know, what's going on?
Right.
I mean, here's the reality all those private corporations that own all those.
What did we say, $150 trillion of UFOs?
What this comes down to is is that stock owned by the Harvard Corporation or is it owned by the taxpayer?
Right.
Or both.
Yeah.
Right.
And, Catherine, we can actually say now that we have indications, at least, that the president is paying attention to your missing money issue.
Who was it?
Alex Jones told me that Trump had seen this story and had ordered the audit.
Go, Alex.
And who knows?
Well, I don't think it's that far fetched, actually.
If you're about to sign a $700 bill, Billion dollar budget with a 56 billion dollar increase for DOD.
I could see why you wouldn't want 21 trillion missing rocketing around the internet.
Oh, good, let's give them lots more.
Right, exactly.
Well, Trump is just the kind of guy who would want to know about where the money was.
Catherine, just sensational information.
And just so everyone knows, we're just warming up here.
We're doing a major two hour overview on control systems in 2018 that's going to come out shortly.
And subscribers will get that first.
Now's the time to subscribe at dark.
Journalist.com, so we can give you the 2017 discount.
And thank you, everyone.
Have a very Merry Christmas.
We'll be back next week with a number of deep episodes and Dr. Joseph Farrell.
So, amazing things in the Cube.
Have a wonderful holiday, and I'll see you soon.
Don't forget to sign up for our newsletter to stay updated on the latest shows.