Just When You Thought The Fort Knox Gold Story Was Over – BAM!

from SilverDoctors:

Koos Jansen crashes Mnuchin’s party. Koos is well researched and has been bringing the Fort Knox truth bombs for many years now…

Koos Jansen fired off a Tweet today about how in the 1960s, so much Fort Knox gold was sent from the US to London that one of the vault floors literally collapsed:

Striking and curious in that small article snippet was that the Fed Chair of the time William McChesney Martin said the Fed (not the Treasury) was going defend the peg “to the last ingot”.

Recall that the US dollar was convertible by sovereign nations, into gold, at $35 per ounce after WWII. That was known as the “Bretton Woods Agreement”, and that agreement is what Nixon axed on August 15, 1971 when he severed the tie to gold.

Here is more from Koos Jansen analyzing the FOIA release of documents earlier this year which revealed new information on Fort Knox:

What is worrying is that the reports now in my possession reveal the audit procedures have not competently been executed. Combine that with the fact the documents are incomplete and redacted, and the result is suspicion of fraud. In this blog post we’ll have a first critical look at the reports and the problems to be found within.

It should be clear that the US Treasury (owner of the gold), US Mint (main custodian), Federal Reserve Bank Of New York (second custodian), and the Office Inspector General of the US Treasury (head auditor), are reluctant to disclose information about the audits of the gold at the four largest depositories that store over 8,000 fine metric tonnes. Consider that the most seasoned gold analysts aren’t even aware this gold is audited.

What nobody knows is that according the US government 100 per cent of the Deep Storage gold has been audited in between 1974 and 2008. Over the years my inquiries at the US government though regular channels have produced little intelligence about the physical audits of the Deep Storage gold. Some departments cooperated at first, but eventually they stopped replying emails or just hang up the phone while I was talking. The second layer of defense was raised when I started submitting FOIAs. Instead of honoring my requests they tried to delay and dodge most appeals. Clearly, the US government prefers not to answer my questions than to flaunt with the audit results.

However, in 2016 I embraced the motivation to push through and find out how many gold bars were counted, weighed and assayed in between 1993 and 2008, when allegedly the last series of physical audits was conducted. Not surprisingly, zero US government departments could provide me the information I was looking for, but through certain FOIAs I obtained leads to submit new FOIAs, and so on 12 Augustus 2016 I demanded, inter alia, the “memoranda submitted by the US Mint Director’s representative regarding audits of the Mint Schedule of Custodial Gold and Silver Reserves to the Chief Financial Officer drafted from 1993 through 2008”. The Mint replied this request would costs me $3,144.96 dollars because it would take 40 hours to search the respective documents, 8 hours for review, and additional costs would be incurred to duplicate 1,200 pages. I thought this was hogwash – 1,200 pages seemed out of proportion for such memoranda, how hard can it be to find a few pages and how did they know it were going to be 1,200 pages if they had to search 40 hours for it – but decided to start a crowdfunding campaign to collect the money.

In the documents provided, Mr Jansen uncovers attempt after attempt to delay, stall, misdirect, obfuscate and flat out lie. In a process that Koos has been working on over the course of years, with his own time and money, his efforts are not at all in vein. If his pressure produced results (Koos is in the Netherlands), surely one would think a full onslaught from the gold community in the United States could get even closer to the truth and uncover even more. Jansen’s excellent research uncovered typical ways the Mint and officials that actually work directly with the gold blur the data.

First, they barely weigh any gold when they inspect the gold:

We need to discuss the sample size of the gold verification. In 1998 at Fort Knox 19,800 gold bars were inspected but only 105 of them were weighed and assayed (exhibit 7.2). That’s not much in my humble opinion. In any case, I expected a higher sample size.

Secondly, for the tiny bit of gold they did weigh, the scales they were using were not accurate:

When all parties tried to reconcile the weight of samples on 22 and 23 July 2004, they found out, “the scale was reading at ounces rather than fine troy ounces”, because, “a setting on the scale had not been properly changed”. Allegedly this is what caused alternative readings in the books of the Director of the Mint’s Representative and the OIG’s Representative. And presumably because nobody could figure out how to use the scale correctly they decided to postpone re-weighing the samples until 24 August 2004. This failure of how to use a scale is a colossal disaster for the credibility of the Deep Storage audit procedures.

Read More @ SilverDoctors.com