“Only You Can Save Yourself Now” (Uncut) 03-18-2025

Bank Lobby Threatens ‘Great Taking’ Author: “Only You Can Save Yourself Now”

After interviewing the world’s top financial minds for over 10,000 hours, I’ve learned one thing. Most people aren’t ready for what’s coming. That’s why I’m giving you my top 10 essential lessons for safeguarding your wealth for free at dannyrapport.com. This guide reveals the biggest threats to your financial freedom.

You’ll also get ITM’s free gold and silver protection guide, a must have for anyone serious about preserving their wealth. Get yours now at dannyrapport.com. I didn’t even, I didn’t really want to do this interview. I thought about saying, look, I can’t talk about this.

This is not happy. You mean you care about humanity? That’s impossible. I can count the number of citizens in a state that actually showed up to do anything on one hand.

They have lied across the board. When you say they’re lying, the banks are lying. We’re dealing with a bully.

The banking lobby is a bully. The way you deal with a bully is you must expose and embarrass the bully publicly. You must do it on the spot in front of everyone.

I mean, I hear the frustration, you know, compared to the last time we spoke, there was such great optimism. Where does this put your crusade? What do you do now? Welcome back to the Daniella Comboni Show. Joining me now, author of The Great Taking, David Webb.

David, so good to be back with you. It’s great to see you again. Well, I think there’s greater forces at play because you were supposed to join the broadcast I just had with Ed Griffin, author of Jekyll Island, the feature from Jekyll Island.

We, you know, we’ve been talking for a while there was an issue of why you couldn’t join. And now we were hoping Mr. Griffin would join this broadcast, but hopefully he will still be able to join. But I didn’t wanna lose this opportunity to speak with you because I know you’ve been lobbying hard.

You have been working hard. You joined forces with G. Edward Griffin. I mean, what an incredible union here.

The author of The Great Taking, like I said, with the author of The Creature from Jekyll Island, you’ve been working together and you’ve been working hard to strike two exemptions in Article 8 of the Uniform Commercial Code, which gives priority to secured creditors over investors. The last time I spoke with you, you were working so hard, working with lawyers, going to Tennessee, going to South Dakota. I wanna get the latest from you on how your process has been and do you come with good news here? I come with hard news, very hard news.

And I have to say I’ve never done an interview like this. And it’s a hard message that people need to hear. So I’m not sure how to do this, but I’ll build my way up to it.

I wanna say about Ed that I’ve been, I’ve essentially been at this for 25 years, quarter of a century. That sounds like a long time. I’m 65.

Ed has been at this my entire lifetime. That gives you some idea of the gravitas that he has. And I respect that so much.

And really all the disappointments he has gone through in trying to get people to listen, trying to get people to understand how important this is and what we’re facing. So he’s done that for 65 years. So the reason I couldn’t join the call before, we were in a three hour committee session that just went on and on and on.

And we were not, our bill wasn’t, they didn’t get to our bill until the end of the three hours so everybody was pretty tired by that point. This was in Connecticut. I have to say we’re still alive in Connecticut.

We’re still alive in New Hampshire. There has been a bill filed in Pennsylvania. There may be a hearing on a bill in Mississippi in the fall.

But I wanna give you a feeling for what it’s like trying to put this across. But wait, before you go there, let’s just give folks who are maybe new, who haven’t joined our past conversations, just some context. Yes.

And this is a very simplistic statement I’m about to make, but basically you’re looking, your mission, your purpose, if I may, is to give rights back to investors that they might not even know are taken from them. Yes, they’re told that they own their securities. They don’t.

They don’t own their securities. It’s a fact. And how do you know you don’t own your securities? Because if an intermediary somewhere in the financial system fails, if they become insolvent, you have no right to recover your own securities out of the insolvency.

That means it’s not your property. And this is irrefutable. So we know that.

And how do we know it? We know it because of a legal document, a response of the New York Federal Reserve Bank to the EU, a committee of the EU called the Legal Certainty Group. This was in 2006 when Europe was being pressured to conform to this same system. It was implemented in the US.

So they sent this very detailed questionnaire to the Fed and the Fed responded specifically about the operation of Article VIII of the Uniform Commercial Code. So we have a detailed definitive response. This is not conspiracy theory.

It’s not conjecture. So we know this. That’s a simple explanation.

You have an appearance of ownership. You have what is sometimes called beneficial ownership, meaning that you can buy and sell the security, you get the dividends, but it does not work like ownership if your broker fails or importantly, there’s a failure at a higher level within the financial system, then you don’t have a property right. So our efforts have been to make people aware of this.

Lots of people are now aware of this, certainly over a million people globally, maybe 2 million people globally. The book has been translated into eight or nine languages. I didn’t do that.

People just picked up and did this. It’s had tremendous attention. I’ve talked about this before.

We’ve had tremendous interest from legislators. So to begin with, in December of 23, there was this Zero Hedge article about the book and the documentary. And then right on the heels of that, two bills were brought just in light speed, one in South Dakota and another in Tennessee.

That process has been documented in a film that’s out now. It’s up on YouTube called Stop It, The Great Taking. So that’s different than the first documentary.

This is something that chronicles the legislative efforts last year. And actually the title of that, Stop It, that was Ed’s idea to call it Stop It. And he was really the first person I met with coming into the year before any of that began to talk about what should we do and how would we do it.

So this legislative effort really moved very rapidly. And then this year we have had bills coming in eight states. And we’re now well into our learning of what we’re facing from the banking lobby.

And that’s really what I need to talk about. We know all of their arguments and every assertion they have made is false. Everyone, I’ve produced this document called Trust the Experts in which I say, we’re told to trust the experts, the Uniform Law Commission.

What kind of experts are these? All of their assertions are false. And it’s possible to go through this, boom, boom, boom, 15 assertions. All of them, they can be easily exposed as false.

The problem that is not, the problem is that that is not happening. So it’s, let me explain how that works. So in South Dakota, for example, which was the first fight we had this year, we can prevail in committee just by essentially force of will, you have to be there.

And we faced, Don and I faced, Don Brandy, who’s the attorney, heroic guy who has developed the approach, this approach of simply striking these exceptions that give the priority to the secured creditors. Don and I were there. We were up against eight banking lobbyists that came in and we prevailed in that committee against them.

But then what happens is Julie Auk, who brought the bill, and now for the first time, that bill went to the floor of the house. And, but what they, what the banking lobbyists did was they had fanned out and basically frightened all the representatives that something bad would happen if these exceptions were struck, if this was done. So Julie is on the bill trying to hold this down.

And they then have someone else who is a representative. You see, Don and I can’t speak on the floor. The representatives have to do it.

And they will have a representative who essentially is acting like a banking lobbyist. They’re receiving campaign contributions from the banking lobby, and they have a person on the floor stand up and read their statement on the floor. Meanwhile, they just go with muscle right before the vote and they flip the votes so that Julie was really alone facing that.

This then happened in Wyoming as well, same thing. And in that case, the bill was being brought by, this was in the Senate, by the president of the Senate. He’s a very good guy and strong guy and understood this clearly.

I want to explain what would need to happen to counter this. See the banking lobby, they just have a lot of people. They have a lot of people, a lot of muscle.

Now this is the hard thing I need to put across to people. In these cases, you have these heroic legislators that have brought these bills. In South Dakota, in Wyoming, no citizens, none showed up to support those legislators, none.

Now imagine how easy it would be if you had some people who were retired, former finance people, maybe retired lawyers. It doesn’t have to be. They can just be a smart, committed person that would make a point of going around to all the legislators before the vote, just as the banking lobbyists do.

I know in, we just lost in committee in Tennessee, they had rigged things before the committee hearing. I know that the bank lobbyists went to members of that committee three or four times over beforehand. I know that the members of the committee did not even read the testimony before the hearing.

Because it was all wired beforehand that they were not gonna let it progress. The only way to counter that is for citizens to start acting. There’s no other way.

We have no hope otherwise. You have to, so there’s thought, word, and deed. I believe in the power of prayer, but it has to connect through to doing something.

And this is not rocket science. You just have to, you have to, you have to, you would have to understand the issues and you would have to go to the Capitol when this stuff is happening and help to run the process. It would only take two or three committed citizens.

Now, I wanna say- That’s it, you’re not talking like hundreds, but wait, wait, wait. Why do you think there’s hesitation of folks not showing up? Is it because lack of interest, knowledge, fear? I, it is, and that’s part of the reason I wanted to add on the call too, because we’ve gone through the same thing. We’re in the spiritual realm here in terms of it really will require a kind of conversion of spirit in people to, it’s like people are in a kind of hypnosis or sleepwalking through things.

People, one way I explain it is that our whole society works based on putting the responsibility on someone else all the time. And it’s like a narcotic that people self-administer that Donald Trump is gonna handle this or someone else is gonna handle it, I’m off the hook. And to the extent, of course, we’ve had a lot of people saying, good going, glad you’re doing this, emotional support from people, but they don’t understand they personally have to do something.

And we have had people that have done that, but I wanna say, this is the shocking thing. You see this hand, it has five fingers. I can count the number of citizens in a state that actually showed up to do anything on one hand.

This is out of hundreds of thousands of people that know about this. That is a shocking thing. It says something shocking about our society.

And I have to, that’s the purpose of what I’m saying here. I didn’t even, I didn’t really wanna do this interview. I thought about saying, look, I can’t talk about this.

This is not happy, but I have to say to people, maybe you knew something about this. Maybe you were glad that people were doing something about it, but I have to confront you personally. You personally did nothing.

You have to hear that. You have to hear that, the person on the other side of the screen. And I know you did nothing because I would know your name if you had done anything.

If you had shown up in your state, I would know that. I would know you. That’s how personal this is.

Wow. Well, that’s, would you say, because look, I spoke to you before you were headed. There was so much optimism and my fear for you, and I even raised it in that interview.

I said, David, I just can’t see the banks rolling over because they’re paying attention. They’ve noticed you, right? You’re absolutely right there. And we knew that, and Don has said the same thing.

We know we’re in for a fight, but I wanna convey to people how easily this could have been done because they have lied across the board. Every assertion they’ve made is, we can easily demonstrate that it is false, but it has to be done personally and directly. So it can be done by people understanding this, meeting with their legislators.

I have to say what the legislators do, it’s kind of a willful ignorance. They do not wanna know about this. So they do not read what they’re sent.

They do not wanna know. Now that’s different than the one heroic legislator that’s bringing the bill. The other people on the committees, they don’t even look at the material that they’re sent.

However brief it is, they don’t read it. The only way to get through to them is for their constituent to get in their face and explain the issues and make sure they understand it doesn’t take long, but it has to be done. Somebody has to do it.

And then the other thing on the floor is if we’re dealing with a bully, the banking lobby is a bully and they threaten people. They have, and they threaten the states. And the way you deal with a bully is you must expose and embarrass the bully publicly.

You must do it on the spot in front of everyone. And it’s easily done, but somebody has to do it. So we have been able to do that in committees and we win the committee, but then people on the floor have to be prepped beforehand.

The representative, I have to say the representative who’s handling it on the floor has to be prepared. They only have a couple of minutes to speak. They have to discredit the banking lobby immediately in a couple of minutes.

They can’t be- When you say they’re lying, the banks are lying. I know it’s a- I’ll go through, shall I go through? Let me go through some examples. Yeah, if you could give me like the biggest example that’s so obvious to you.

You have priority. One way they read the first instance in the code that says that the entitlement holder has priority, except you do not with the insolvency of the intermediary. So they say you have priority, but you do not with insolvency of the intermediary, which we know from the Fed itself.

So that’s the first thing. Then you have property rights. Well, you don’t have property rights because in insolvency, you can’t take your property back out of the insolvency, which we know from the bankruptcy of Lehman.

We know from the explanation of the Fed itself. So these are, it only takes a few seconds really, 15 seconds to explain why each of these. Now there’s documentation behind that, but you can then, no customer lost anything in Lehman.

They will say that. Except the people whose property was taken, which is easily demonstrated from the bankruptcy decision itself. You see how it’s possible.

They’ll make these assertions and no one challenges them. Or that an agreement is required. The property cannot be used without agreement.

Now that assertion was made in one of the hearing in New Hampshire or in North Dakota by the chief counsel of the Uniform Law Commission that the property cannot be used without agreement. And he cited a section of the code, the UCC, that says that in the first instance. But then there’s an exception beneath that that makes it clear the property can be used without agreement.

This is how the code works. So you can easily, they will, it’s just like their assertion that you have priority, except you don’t. It’s always under the, or in this example, there must be an agreement, except you don’t have to have an agreement when you read lower.

So these, each of these points is very simply dealt with, or they will try to create the impression that you had to have these changes in order to have a modern electronic security system that we have today. That is very easily pierced by pointing out that, or that this was necessitated by the paperwork crisis, that we, because of paper securities, that didn’t work anymore and we had to have these changes. Well, the paperwork crisis was in 1968.

This wasn’t adopted by all 50 states for 33 years. So how did the system operate all that time without this change having been made for more than three decades, or that you have to have these changes for electronic trading to work? NASDAQ was founded in 1971. There was electronic trading for 30 years before this was put in place.

So it was clearly about something else, but they’ll make these assertions and no one refutes them on the spot. And the way committee hearings are done, it’s very, the way, you know, we may speak first and then the banking lobby is allowed to say whatever they’re gonna say, and we have no opportunity to rebut what they’ve said. You know, things are managed that way.

So the only way to do it is to have citizens that have looked at this, understand it. It’s not rocket science to understand this and to have met with their representatives and said, look, these people are lying. You have to understand that.

And they have to impress that upon their representatives. Representatives need to know that their constituents care about this. It’s not gonna- So what are the next steps for you, David? I mean, I’m saddened to hear, I mean, I hear the frustration in your voice and, you know, compared to the last time we spoke, there was such great optimism.

I felt you were heading into this with such great hopes for change. Well, I think we’re hitting the real stuff here. We’re hitting the real stuff.

And again, that’s why, you know, I feel this connection with Ed Griffin because he has dealt with this for so long that if we are going to protect humanity, if we don’t wanna be slaves, we have to have some kind of a shift on a personal level. And otherwise, we’re in big trouble here. You’re not gonna have real change.

So this is the value of what is happening here. We can’t know things without encountering it, grappling with it. And you may remember there was this kind of comic that was in the newspapers, at least when I was a kid, where this little, yeah, the little figure would say, we’ve met the enemy and it’s us.

And boy, is that true. The banking interest could not do this stuff if people would personally engage, but they don’t. That’s why we’re in this situation.

It’s pretty incredible how the banking lobby is in unison and know exactly what to say across the board. And they are, and they’re not very creative. They read the same script over and over again.

They just assert the same things. And it’s really kind of laughable. It should be so easily exposed.

So, but the other thing here is the money, this money system. And it’s part of our culture that people say, hey, no one’s paying me to do this. Why would I do that? I’m not being paid.

And that’s why we’re in this situation. These banking lobbyists, they are paid to do this stuff. And the people on the committees don’t see the difference between people that are paid to read this stuff.

They don’t even understand. They don’t even understand what they’re saying. And they dismiss Don and I because we are from out of state.

It’s bizarre. We are real human beings. They’ll ask, who do you represent? And I’ll say, I represent myself.

I’m doing this because I care about people. And they can’t wrap their brains around that. There’s something suspicious about that.

But the banking lobbyists, because they’re from within their state, they’re okay somehow. You mean you care about humanity? That’s impossible. You know, David, where does this put your crusade? Do you see it as a step back on hold? Are you just gonna keep pushing forward? What do you do now? I have to say people have to realize they have to save themselves here.

No one’s gonna do it for them. And that’s the hard, that’s the hard message. Yeah, yeah.

That’s the message. Well, look, I appreciate you coming on today and giving us an update. Unfortunately, it’s not the news we wanted to hear.

And hopefully we’ll get Ed Griffin connected with us, if not today, eventually, and we’ll make this round table happen because I do think it’s pretty incredible that both your paths have crossed. Two books that have influenced and have been read by millions globally. I don’t think it’s by chance that you’re on the same wavelength and you’ve become great friends.

So hopefully we can make that happen. In the meantime, I thank you. I thank you.

I thank you for everything. Yeah, Daniela, I wanna thank you. And you know that you were the person that came to mind when I was, originally I was hoping to have, an energizing message and that Ed and I would talk about this.

And you came to mind for both of us. It’s the person we wanted to do that with. And I think you understand the gravitas of this.

And this message right now is, it’s a hard message, but it is what people need to hear if we’re going to, if we’re really gonna change things. I am honored, honored. And thank you so much for thinking of me.

And we, like I said, we will attempt to make this round table happen. You know what? Nothing’s going to stop us, David. How’s that? How about that? Yeah, that is true.

Okay, well, hopefully we’ll get this message out. I think it’s truly important that the people hear that from you. Thank you, David.

And thank you all for watching. We’ll have more content. Sign up at danielakomboday.com. And of course, subscribe to our YouTube channel.

It means the world to us. That’s it for us. Thanks for watching.

Thank you.