Just A Review

[allodial]

The main distinction is whether the "lawful money' is elastic or inelastic....

I suppose most any currency has some elasticity to it. Even gold coin could be more valuable one day than the next due to fluctuations in demand for gold. However, it might still serve to be a just weight and balance and inelastic in the sense that flucations would tend to be 'universal' (i.e. effecting all within the context) in scope.

... This is probably due to the fact that each of these men and women 'moonlight' for "Mr. Stranger" and prefer said 'moonlighting' over their 'day job'.

Well you might have hit the nail on the head or pretty close. Or it might be something to do with...

"State Secrets" an attorney and his underlings not being able to reveal their clients' secrets. As in, they might want to help but cannot due to some oath taken. Or perhaps they are partners with Mr. Stranger selling out their own brethren for a mess of pottage? Or perhaps Congress might be chiefly complicity? Or perhaps Congress and the FRB are merely sideshows or "stunt doubles" for others? Since the US Code is made openly available for most all to read, perhaps then there is another perspective...

It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter. (Proverbs 25:2)

Somehow an above post got truncated so I retype:

P.S. Consider that the underwriting activity that a state bank or a federal bank might engage in might only ever be with respect to repossessed assets or with respect to abandoned assets. As in if a bank or a bank holding company [two different things] ever issued its own money it would likely only be underwritten by assets that it confiscated or abandoned assets (i.e. repossession, foreclosure, abandonment, 1099-A, plunder, overpayments, etc.--double dipping might however would be more along the lines of extreme usury and plunder). Apart from services provided, banks don't tend to originate anything of value.

That a bank stands to gain heavily through ignorance or lack of knowledge is telling. Consider that Governments have tended to make substantial gains similarly: through forfeiture, asset seizure, tax foreclosures, escheats and abandonment. That they are so interested in your stuff is perhaps revealing something: they don't have much of anything of value without you. This might be shocking but banks and credit card companies are at least in part in the business of turning accounting entries into tangible assets: they want you to fail to pay so they can repossess tangible items. Perhaps they are supposed to (primarily) be in the business of providing telegraphic, accounting and legal services or perhaps that is what they pretend. Consider that new car loans are secured by the cars purchased (proof would be in repossession)--therefore, a bank isn't risking anything except a bet as to whether you will pay the repayment amount on time or at all. If the reader doesn't believe that a bank would repossess a $50K car and still require the 'borrower' to repay the remainder of the loan, I have something for you:

.