War in the Persian Gulf and Signs of Market Collapse (Part 4)
Forecast: "What Happens Behind the Pseudo-Negotiation Processes" (published October 29, 2025, links)
S. Dragan:
... and the result of his (Larry Fink) plan will most be recognized around April 4, 2026. When it will be understood that his efforts were not in vain, according to the plan he aimed for.
As already discussed in the previously published 1, 2, and 3 parts of the Confirmation (from April 1, 2, and 8), the realization of S. Dragan's forecast becomes increasingly likely that "... the result of his (Larry Fink) plan will most be recognized around April 4, 2026...".
With each new day of war, this becomes more obvious.
To start the 4th part of this Confirmation, let's begin with the words "Who has the war, who has the motherland."
And in this context, the informal alliance between Donald Trump and Larry Fink is particularly interesting.
According to the old cliché, opposites attract. And perhaps there is no brighter example than the strange, intriguing, and beneficial relationship between Larry Fink and Donald Trump.
The alliance formed on Wall Street, where the head of BlackRock, known for its ultra-globalist views and commitment to ESG principles, once served as Trump's financial advisor, and the populist Republican president still seeks Fink's counsel on economic matters, as reported by The Post.
These relations extended beyond the 2024 US presidential election period, continuing into 2025 planning for Ukraine's reconstruction, which has already been "sucked dry" (of course, with some profit for themselves). But it would also be naive to think they weren't relevant when deciding on the war in the Persian Gulf.
Despite its immense size, "BlackRock" prefers to stay under the radar. There is not much information about it online and it's barely covered by major media.
Let's stop for a moment and consider what experts believe: that many financial insiders are using the Persian Gulf war to enrich themselves, even resorting to insider trading. Is there any evidence for this?
Let's turn to various media for answers.
As Reuters reported on April 8th, 2.5 hours before Donald Trump's announcement of a ceasefire with Iran, investors sold off oil futures by nearly $1 billion. According to American sources close to "Kommersant FM," the topic has already attracted interest from the FBI and the relevant committee. Insider trading is permitted in limited cases with stocks, but not in the oil market. Charges could be based on more serious articles - using insider information. The outcome of the investigation remains to be seen.
Who in the US administration "whispered" to "shorten" oil is not revealed. Others watched sadly as, after the announcement of the ceasefire (April 8th), quotes plummeted by 15%. First below $100 per barrel, then they approached $90. However, Reuters notes that such large one-time deals are rare, but since the war in Iran began, trading volumes and volatility have increased significantly. Traders consider this case something more than just luck or successful trading algorithm work.
It all started with the launch of the TRUMP and MELANIA tokens. As for futures, it is extremely difficult to prosecute for insider trading on this market under U.S. laws. Therefore, insiders, if they want to open a large position, especially without significant investments and using high leverage, prefer to trade futures.
And before Trump, there were suspicions of insider trading in American politics. At one point, Nancy Pelosi's investment portfolio outperformed Warren Buffett's. Traders already knew which congressmen's deals to watch. However, proving a violation of the law is quite difficult, says American private investor Felix Frankel:
"Financial questions unrelated to politics are self-deception. As for insider trading, there are two main theories. The first is that such restrictions should not exist at all, as this would make prices reflect information faster, ultimately leading to fewer people suffering losses. The second is that it should be completely illegal. I believe it should be punished, but not just on Wall Street - responsibility should extend to Congress and the Senate as well."
Do those who simply guessed have a right? Yes, 100%. Similar deals happen all over America. Yet, only 15-20% of perpetrators are caught.
When asked during Easter events at the White House what he would do if he defeated Iran, Trump replied, "I'd take the oil, I'm a businessman first." Could potential charges of insider trading affect the current US administration's standing? Political analysts at the agency doubt it. Neither the events in Minneapolis, nor the Jeffrey Epstein files, nor the nearly 60-day government shutdown have any notable impact on Trump's actions, according to "The FM Journal."
«When it comes to big politics - elections, approval ratings, and all that - the fluctuations aren't as significant. During the Watergate scandal on August 8 (1974), when Nixon resigned, his approval rating was around 8%. What exactly would it take in politics for an approval rating to drop to those same 8%?»
Whether it's Trump or not, it doesn't matter. A scandal of Watergate's magnitude today might not even garner much special attention.»
On March 23, just 15 minutes before Trump once again delayed attacks on Iran's bridges and power plants, investors sold off $500 million worth of oil. However, there have been no official reports of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission or other bodies beginning an investigation.
The business-like nature of the U.S. President is evident in several facts. One of them is Trump's desire to get a 'share of Iran' and take 'bribes' for the passage of ships through the Strait of Hormuz.
On April 6th, US President Donald Trump stated that his country could collect its own fees from ships passing through the Strait of Hormuz while Iran continues to control the key energy artery. According to the American leader, this should be considered an alternative to allowing Tehran to "take their money."
It is absolutely clear that in the financial sphere, when large "profits" are involved, everything is shrouded in an information fog and a lack of transparency of events. All of this or at least part of the truth will become apparent after some period of time.
Let's recall the experts' opinion that the main goal for the head of BlackRock is to create a state of uncertainty and add to the "fog" by issuing new, often contradictory, forecasts about the development of the situation in the future.
Exactly on the contradictory conclusions about the course and outcome of the war, leading to market volatility, are achieved the most significant financial successes.
Larry Fink, CEO of the world's largest investment fund BlackRock (through which, conspiracy theorists believe, a shadow global government led by the Rothschilds and Rockefellers controls the planet), predicts a price range of $40 per barrel at year-end, if tensions ease, up to over $150 if the Ormuz blockade continues. A gallon of gasoline in the U.S. would cost at least $5 (currently $3.9), fatally impacting the local economy and the Republican Party led by Trump in the latter case.
The aforementioned information leads to the preliminary conclusion that:
the efforts of ... the very same Larry Fink, who may be a hidden... or not so hidden market maker, i.e., someone who is somehow able to influence the trajectory of market trends, or perhaps even shape them... were not in vain, according to the plan he aimed for.
(continuation follows)
