Quantcast
Feeds: Email, RSS & Twitter

Get Our Videos By Email

 

8,300 Unique Visitors In The Past Day

 

Powered by Squarespace

 

Most Recent Comments
Cartoons & Photos
SEARCH
« WATCH: Americans Don't Know Who Washington D.C. Is Named After | Main | Obamacare Chief Architect Is A Sneaky, Lying Bastard »
Friday
Dec122014

Elizabeth Warren: 'Citigroup Runs The White House'

Senator Elizabeth Warren talks bailouts, swaps, and Citigroup's control over Obama and the executive branch.

If Citigroup has the power to break up Dodd-Frank, we need to break up Citigroup.

---

FULL CLIP

"There is nothing wrong with Citigroup asking for something that is in its best interests,’’ said Mike Mayo, a banking analyst at CLSA, a brokerage and investment group.

“The issue is that Congress should say no."

As The New York Times reported last year, lawmakers adopted nearly every word of Citigroup’s plan in drafting a bill that would repeal a requirement that banks “push out” some derivatives trading into units that are not backed by the government’s deposit insurance fund.

 

 

More details at Wonkette...

 

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

Reader Comments (74)

Plutocracy rules.
Dec 12, 2014 at 11:28 PM | Unregistered CommenterDailyBail
So treasury issues survival kits to bankers and we are now on the hook for 330 trillion in derivative exposure. Is it plutocracy or fucking insanity.

Elizabeth was genuine in her concern and stood alone. I think people should become very concerned about now.
Dec 12, 2014 at 11:49 PM | Unregistered Commenterjohn
I'll take 'fucking insanity' for the win.
Dec 12, 2014 at 11:59 PM | Registered CommenterDailyBail
I've been absent the past 2 days covering the UVA Rape Hoax for another site, and on my Twitter account.

As most of you know, I'm a UVa grad and so the story has been personal for me, especially in the past few days as it has emerged that Jackie made of the entire fantastical, delusional tale in order to win the sympathy of a freshman boy who had spurned her.

She created a fake identity and Catfished her friends. Truly stunning.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2014/12/10/rolling_stone_sabrina_rubin_erdely_the_washington_post_inches_closer_to.html?wpsrc=fol_tw
Dec 13, 2014 at 12:06 AM | Registered CommenterDailyBail
One thing I’ve been watching in total astonishment since September 2008 is the dramatic increase of cash sitting UN-insured in FDIC financial institutions.

Back then, that total was $2.68 trillion.

For September 2014, it’s $10.17 trillion (total deposits) - $6.13 trillion (insured deposits) = $4.04 trillion uninsured deposits.

(---(Source: $10.17 trillion, see https://www.fdic.gov/bank/statistical/stats/2014sep/industry.html

MINUS

$6.13, see https://www.fdic.gov/bank/statistical/stats/2014sep/fdic.html )—)

About 35% of total U.S. deposits are held by JPM Chase, Citi, and BofA, so you figure roughly that 35% of that low-hanging $4 trillion fruit ball is now exposed to the derivatives casino, or $1.4 trillion.

See http://www.usbanklocations.com/bank-rank/total-deposits.html for total deposits for all 6600+ U.S. banks. (Wells Fargo has over a $1 trillion in deposits, too, but isn’t really part of the derivatives casino.)

That’s twice the size of TARP, no?

If I didn’t know any better, I’d think Congress just passed the next bailout bill.
Dec 13, 2014 at 12:30 AM | Unregistered CommenterCheyenne
I've talked with a couple of older people who are financial experts and when derivatives are mentioned, they say they would never deal with them. I wanted to find some easily understood material to post here but came across this.

http://www.edhec-risk.com/events/other_events/Event.2014-01-22.6397/attachments/Till_CAIA_History_of_Derivatives_Final_with_PRMIA.pdf
------
Go to pages 49-52 and that really freaked me out regarding gold and other commodities. Is this why there has been so much manipulation among other things?
Dec 13, 2014 at 7:44 AM | Unregistered Commenterjohn
Hillary Clinton’s Wall Street Allies CRUSH Elizabeth Warren in the First Battle of the Democratic Primary
Liberals powerless to stop the Clinton-Wall Street gravy train


http://freebeacon.com/blog/hillary-clintons-wall-street-allies-crush-elizabeth-warren-in-the-first-battle-of-the-democratic-primary/


“It is time for all of us to stand up and fight,” she said on the Senate floor. In the end, more than 50 House Democrats supported the spending package, which was also backed by the White House.

Warren, who many consider to be the Democratic frontrunner in 2016 should Joe Biden stay out of the race, specifically attacked Citigroup, the financial firm who helped write the pro-Wall Street provision. As it turns out, Citigroup is one of the most generous supporters of Hillary Clinton’s political career. The firm has paid Bill Clinton hundreds of thousands of dollars to for speeches. Shots fired, as they say.

[ the screenshot here is amazing, I couldn't post it so go the the link]

JPMorgan Chase, another prominent Hillary backer, also lobbied for the provision; CEO Jamie Dimon made personal calls to lawmakers to rally support. Hillary has an account with JP Morgan worth between $5 million and $25 million, according to financial disclosure forms. Some Democrats were not impressed with Warren’s efforts, as Dave Weigel reports:
This rattled the Democrats’ appropriators, some of whom were heading for the exits. Virginia Rep. Jim Moran spent a good part of Thursday telling reporters that Warren was “running for president” and drowning Democrats in her ambition.
Dec 13, 2014 at 8:51 AM | Unregistered Commenterjohn
Let tell you all something. Yesterday on cspin, I listened to some, not all, of the debate on the floor. Most of the proceedings were back slapping congratulatory speeches about how bipartisan the process was. Did everyone enjoy the whole package? No. They went from the floor of the Senate to the puppet in command who was not happy with the bill but wanted it to pass as it was. Lindsay Graham followed Warren and really just what a dick. To cap it all off for me was that nitwit Mikulski, who in all her Godamned wisdom and in typical Baltimoron fashion just butchered the English language and for all due intents, had no point to her speech. Warren is backed financially by mostly powerhouse international law firms and I doubt seriously that she will mount any kind of challenge to that dry old hag Clinton.
Dec 13, 2014 at 9:21 AM | Unregistered Commenterskinflint
http://www.mikulski.senate.gov/. Not anything in particular, but just to listen to this awful woman.
Dec 13, 2014 at 9:27 AM | Unregistered Commenterskinflint
President Obama has lost my support due to his favored treatment of the big banks over "we the people" like me. He failed to prosecute the banks. The mortgage bank settlements are a joke. No with this budget shenanigans, Obama has torn down the door and the foxes now own the entire hen house. The CVPB is a joke -- letting the banks self-investigate complaints against them. Where do the American people turn to now? God save "we the people" from the big banks.
Dec 13, 2014 at 3:45 PM | Unregistered CommenterBrenda Reed
Barbra Mikuski in last nights speech at the Senate said that with this new spending bill that even more money was available to the SEC and the CPA to investigate and prosecute fraud and grifters. I felt much better knowing this and total confidence in Mary Jo White.
Dec 13, 2014 at 3:54 PM | Unregistered Commenterskinflint
Americans, Ladies & Gentlemen,

First to say I am proud being an American, then to realized that we live in a country of freedom, democracy, and values.
Further more, how do we tell our children and the future generation that America is been run by corrupted politicians and
their buddies from Wall St and the banks. We were fooled once and we took it and put up with it. When we were told by our president at the time, that they were too big to fail. Now we realized once again, that the manipulation and the distrust of the politicians with the banks' lobbies write their own bills so they can get their ways in wall st.

I thought we learned our lesson from the financial crisis of 2008 that paralyzed the economy and millions of people lost their jobs and as a result, they lost their homes. How little we knew then that the banks foreclosed millions of homes that weren't theirs to begin with. Due to the same scam of securitization, derivatives, and many tactics the banks only know how to get away with, millions of homes were lost in the process that even today is implemented through out all the United States.

The banks know they have the edge because most American people do not know their rights, and the law to go about to fight for their homes. we had even seen for those who can afford an attorney to find out later, even with an attorney, the judge give the right to the bank and still foreclose on their homes. So the question is, when are we going to learn once and for all and no let big banks like JP Morgan, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, and City Bank continue taking advantage of the system and on us. We are living like in a third world countries. Why do we have a President and Laws in the books to stop this madness. Can we afford another financial crisis of Trillions of Dollars for the next 10 years? Americans please wake up and listen to Senator Elizabeth Warren. We need thousands of women like Mrs. Warren to represent us and run a better senate and a better country. God Bless You and God Bless America.
Dec 13, 2014 at 6:46 PM | Unregistered CommenterFox
Will somebody please give this woman a medal? I've waited my whole life to hear one politician with balls enough to speak the truth. I salute you Senator Warren. May your words not fall on deaf ears.
Dec 14, 2014 at 12:53 AM | Unregistered CommenterFriend of the Universe
The spending bill did nothing to instill confidence in the system for me, the banks won the greatest fraud in American history in 2008, today they set the stage for even greater things...

Where there is no law there can be no criminals.
Dec 14, 2014 at 3:10 AM | Unregistered CommenterS. Gompers
Gomp, I might add that where there is no law. there is no justice. The spending bill passed. Just unbelievable.
Dec 14, 2014 at 7:00 AM | Unregistered Commenterskinflint
Worthy of a read if for nothing else the scorn heaped onto the freshly elected regurgicrats. http://humanevents.com/2014/12/10/cromnibus-a-winter-festival-of-unrestrained-spending/
Dec 14, 2014 at 9:34 AM | Unregistered Commenterskinflint
REPORT: Larry Summers warned Elizabeth Warren to stay quiet about the banking oligarchy

Larry leaned back in his chair and offered me some advice. ... He teed it up this way: I had a choice. I could be an insider or I could be an outsider. Outsiders can say whatever they want. But people on the inside don’t listen to them. Insiders, however, get lots of access and a chance to push their ideas. People — powerful people — listen to what they have to say. But insiders also understand one unbreakable rule. They don’t criticize other insiders.

I had been warned.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/12/14/elizabeth-warren-is-changing-washington-without-giving-up-her-outside-status/
Dec 14, 2014 at 5:16 PM | Unregistered CommenterDailyBail
Well I still say she is backed by a bunch of powerful international law groups. Time will tell with Warren. If somehow she ends up with child porn on her computer hard drive then we will know where she stands.
Dec 14, 2014 at 6:13 PM | Unregistered Commenterskinflint
So true Skinflint.
Dec 15, 2014 at 11:25 AM | Unregistered CommenterS. Gompers
@DB-just like the Duke lax rape case was personal to me. What's truly stunning is that our prez, Broadhead, was not canned for throwing the lax kids under the bus (but Duke paid the expelled kids million$ in the settled civil case), did not resign like a gentleman, sent a non-apology letter to all alum (and asked for $), and continued to have a libtard voice on and off campus...boggles...

Good to see you at it again, btw. Nothing has changed in the last 5-6 years since this site began, or in the last 1+ year since you disappeared. The fight goes on...
Dec 15, 2014 at 5:23 PM | Unregistered CommenterJosie
Liz Warren is perhaps the greatest hypocrite in American Politics. When she was in a position to stop the bailout of the brokerage industry in 2008/9, she ignored the obvious truth that the equity holders in these institutions needed to be wiped out, and the companies re-booted with fresh equity, the old shareholders subordinated to both the debtholders, the government (which provided the trillions in liquidity to keep them alive), and the new investors in entities which should have been placed under SIPC conservatorship and restructured fairly. Instead, she backed a process that allowed Lloyd Blankfein and the senior executives at every brokerage firm -and they ALL would have failed - to retain their wealth and stock options, despite having run their companies deep, deep into bankruptcy. This was the compromise she made for a political future. This was not even a hard issue or a difficult decision. The market would have embraced it. Instead, she helped cook up a plan that put the taxpayer in harm's way, while protecting the fat cats who pretend to hate her. They then all backed her for a senate run. Now she speaks in platitudes, but isn't it amazing how the banks and brokerages are still getting exactly what they want from Washington?

If she really does go back to telling the truth, and more importantly, insisting on real change and punishing those who caused the mess, that would be great -- except they all have gotten away with it, and the barn door is closed - the cows fattened, slaughtered, eaten and excreted. This is a woman who falsely claimed to be part Native American to get her job at Harvard. She sold out the American public once, so why would she not do it again? Now she wants to be PRESIDENT? Perfect. A total hypocrite and liar with a falsified resume who has never run anything or done anything and when she had a chance let Wall Street run off with $9 trillion dollars. Do we really need another two faced "academic" running the show?

Maybe she will have the US Treasury bail out Putin if she's President. Why not?? Hell, we should let Citibank BUY Afghanistan -- that would be a lot simpler than Obama's plan. Wait...plan?? What plan??
Dec 15, 2014 at 5:54 PM | Unregistered Commenterlaughernyc
Warren was never in a position to stop anything. Ever. Did she comb thru documents in the basement and find loads and loads of thieving excrement? Of course she did. And she would tell those who would listen all about the excrement. But what power did she have?

In the end, all involved (Bush, Hank, Tim-may, Helicopter-Ben, Dodd, Frank, Obummer, Fat Larry et al) took their marching orders from the Godfathers of finance in NYC--the financial elite, the insiders, the financial oligarchy. They rule this country. The individual names of the kings change, but their kingdoms are the same. They are the men behind the curtain. They pull the strings. The borrowers are slaves to the lenders, even when the lenders go bust. Why? Because the lenders own, they control the money and gold and can buy the law. It's just that simple.

In the words of Gordon Gekko:

"We set the price of the paper clip."
"I create nothing; I own."
"If you are not inside, you are outside."
"You're not so naive to think we live in a democracy, are you sport?"
Dec 15, 2014 at 6:28 PM | Unregistered CommenterJosie
It's my hope that DB soon starts the "where's Kevin Yoder" post. Because apparently, like Dorothy, he ain't in Kansas no more...
Dec 16, 2014 at 6:45 PM | Unregistered CommenterJosie
Thanks for the heads up, Josie. Nicely done.
This just came in from the Kansas City Star.

http://www.kansascity.com/opinion/opn-columns-blogs/barbara-shelly/article4535487.html

Elizabeth Warren squashes Kevin Yoder’s sorry rationale for unraveling taxpayer protection

U.S. Rep. Kevin Yoder is doubling down on his dubious explanation that the controversial amendment he sponsored last week in the huge “cromnibus” spending bill passed by Congress was all about helping community banks and farmers.

The amendment, written by lobbyists for Citigroup (that’s the first red flag), repeals a provision in the 2010 Dodd-Frank law that says banks cannot rely on protection from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation when they trade their riskiest assets. In other words, go ahead and gamble, but don’t expect the taxpayers to bail you out.

Yoder, a Republican from Overland Park, Kan., said in his email newsletter that his amendment doesn’t apply to truly risky transactions, but instead removes a burden for smaller banks.

It’s complex, so here is the congressman’s explanation in his own words:

“The provision amends Section 716 of Dodd-Frank, which would have increased transaction costs by requiring banks to push out almost all derivative business into separate entities. The derivatives associated with this provision are not the same as the riskier Collateral Debt Obligations (CDOs) that many blame for causing the mortgage crisis. CDOs remain subject to the push out even after the adoption of this provision.

Without this change, small regional banks would be in danger of being unable to serve the lending needs of their customers. Ultimately, farmers, manufacturers, and other Main Street businesses would be harmed the most. I opposed the taxpayer bailouts in 2008 and stand strong by the provisions in existing law that prohibit bailouts from ever happening again. This fixes an onerous provision of Dodd-Frank that actually made markets less safe and increased the cost of lending. It does not make any change to provisions preventing bailouts.”

Is he right? Not according to Democratic U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, who urged the Senate to reject the spending bill because of Yoder’s amendment.

In a speech on the Senate floor, Warren addressed the explanation Yoder is trying to push:

“The fact sheet Republican appropriators sent around to their members explaining the provision does not describe it accurately,” she said. “According to this fact sheet, the provision in question would protect farmers and other commodity producers from having to put down collateral to get a loan, expand their business, and hedge their production. Whatever you think about the bill, that description is flatly wrong. In fact, that description applies to yet another Wall Street reform rollback that the Republicans are pushing right now, which is attached to a completely different bill. I do not know if Republican leaders in the House are deliberately trying to confuse their members in voting for a government bailout program, or whether they cannot keep straight on their efforts to gut financial reform.”

So, who’s version do we go with here? Yoder’s? Or Warren’s?

No contest. Warren is the expert. Protecting taxpayers from the greed of the financial sector is her wheelhouse.

Yoder, as the nonpartisan research organization Maplight points out, has acquired some expertise in accepting donations from big banks. Since the beginning of 2013, he’s received $29,000 from the political action committees of Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, Bank of America and JPMorgan Chase, which represent more than 90 percent of the swaps market. That doesn’t place Yoder in the 10 ten recipients of the big banks, but he’s close…



Dec 16, 2014 at 8:13 PM | Unregistered Commenterjohn
"Because the lenders own, they control the money and gold and can buy the law.”

For the most part I agree with this. But our problems run a bit deeper, I think.

What disturbs me more than anything else is that the rule of law has pretty much vanished not only in practice—it’s always favored the monied classes in practice, so on that score nothing has changed that’s not reflected in the skewing of wealth distribution—but also in principle. And that is a big, big difference, a lightning vs. lightning bug kind of difference.

This first came to popular attention in December 2012 when the DOJ refused to prosecute HSBC and its bankers not because there wasn’t enough evidence (the bank had admitted to all material elements of its money-laundering crimes), but because Eric Holder said prosecuting would cause “global destabilization” among other “collateral consequences.”

That’s a bald-faced admission that HSBC is above the law. And as we all know, HSBC wasn’t the last bank that got away with admitted crimes because it’s above the law AS A MATTER OF POLICY.

That’s critical because when it comes to governance there are 2 and only 2 choices, and they’re mutually exclusive: either a country lives under the rule of law, or it lives according to the whims of people, often kings or other oligarchs.

The HSBC case is a clear indication that the U.S. is ruled by kings. And there are many other examples that fit the HSBC pattern, though in subtler guises.

Aside from “collateral consequences,” the law is also trampled in the name of “systemic risk,” “national security,” “domestic terrorism,” you name it. What all of these bogeymen have in common is that there’s no set metes and bounds on what those phrases mean. They’re noses of wax used by the king’s men to get whatever it is they happen to want at the time. If those phrases were LEGAL—and they uniformly, by design, are not—they’d be struck down as unconstitutionally vague.

The constitution and the law are supposed to be what protects us from tyranny like this. But they’re both gone in the wind OFFICIALLY. In 2013, under Jim Comey, the FBI changed its mission from “law enforcement” to “national security” in another FORMAL nod to the oligarchs behind the curtain. And oh, yeah, did I mention that Comey was a board member of HSBC just before he got the nod to take over the FBI?

Justice Louis Brandeis warned very clearly about where the path we’re on will take us:

""The government is the potent omnipresent teacher. For good or ill it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. To declare that the end justifies the means -- to declare that the government may commit crimes -- would bring terrible retribution.”

Terrible retribution is one way to describe how this will turn out.

Revolution is another.
Dec 17, 2014 at 12:07 AM | Unregistered CommenterCheyenne
@Cheyenne

Hello again! Good to see you fighting the good fight. Agree with all you state. However, as an example of the law being alive and well, and to make you feel a lil' better, a local drug dealer was arrested and jailed yesterday. His crime? Selling a dime bag in a "transitional" neighborhood. Way to go fellas! Keep us safe...

And the WashPost just figured out that Wall St. is a giant skim:

http://tablet.washingtonpost.com/top/a-black-hole-for-our-best-and-brightest/2014/12/17/c5ce54176c565ab010421f6373b363ad_story.html
Dec 17, 2014 at 10:47 AM | Unregistered CommenterJosie
"Good to see you fighting the good fight."

You'll be seeing a lot more very soon, I hope. I've been helping a guy out with his youtube channel ever since I bought a camera in April. It was a way for him to get his channel up and running and for me to learn how to make videos. The last 2 I made are about the complete corruption of the Justice Department:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BkQQoGUj6VY (Part one: "Eric Holder's Legacy: The Divine Right of Criminals")

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KW4o2eRvzx4 (Part two: "How Eric Holder Turned 'Justice' Into a Wall Street Criminal Protection Racket")

Now I'm about to launch my own channel. The leadoff video will cover a topic very near and dear to our hearts here on DB--the absurd myths propagated to pass TARP. Nancy Pelosi recently retold the legend, which just gets bigger and more ridiculous every year.

Stay tuned...
Dec 17, 2014 at 12:35 PM | Unregistered CommenterCheyenne
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-12-18/united-states-newspeak-%E2%80%93-obama-spins-executive-orders-presidential-memoranda-avoid-s. So yesterdays press briefing we were treated to a reporter asking pointed questions to the new press guy about this subject matter. He could not or would not answer the questions clearly and everyone let him off the hook. Sweet Jesus, Mary and Joseph.
Dec 19, 2014 at 6:32 AM | Unregistered Commenterskinflint
I think the puppet masters use Warren as a distraction.
Jan 3, 2015 at 12:19 PM | Unregistered CommenterSagebrush
@Cheyenne

Their Evolution is almost complete. The general population is running out of options and is essentially powerless to direct those in control of the country.

1776-1913 What the founders intended - A Constitution-based federal republic with strong democratic traditions

1913-1950 Authoritarian Oligarchy - a government in which control is exercised by a small group of individuals whose authority is based on the power of wealth to impose state authority onto many aspects of citizens' lives.

1950-2007 Totalitarian Oligarchy - a government based on wealth and power that seeks to subordinate the individual to the state by controlling not only all political and economic matters, but also the attitudes, values, and beliefs of its population.

2007-20?? Oligarchic Dictatorship - a form of government based on the power of wealth in which a small clique wield absolute power (not restricted by a constitution or laws).

What will the future hold?

2014-20?? Oligarchic Dictatorship?

20??-20?? Revolution - a forcible overthrow of a government or social order in favor of a new system?

20??-20?? Anarchy - a condition of lawlessness or political disorder brought about by the absence of governmental authority?
Jan 3, 2015 at 1:27 PM | Unregistered CommenterSagebrush
Just found this Stockman blog, and as usual, he calls it out:

http://davidstockmanscontracorner.com/wall-street-heathens-how-their-greed-and-gambling-became-an-instrument-of-statist-policy/

Stockman pearls throughout the piece. Surprised he was not featured more prominently, or at all, in the "Money for Nothing" movie of 2013, which provides "insider" commentary confirming what Stockman has said for years.

@Cheyenne-looking forward to your YouTube channel.
Jan 5, 2015 at 12:34 PM | Unregistered CommenterJosie
Sage--

Your timetable is on the money. Over the last 2 years I've been thinking a lot about sovereignty and the glaring erosion of it from the U.S. Yeah, it definitely started in 1913, at least formally, with the congressional abandonment of the constitution's express mandate of coining money.

It would appear, 100 years later, that Madison was right about sovereignty being an all-or-nothing deal. Fruition just took its time. Now it's hard to identify ANY sovereign function that hasn't been outsourced: wars, treaties, lawmaking, law enforcement, you name it--done by private interests. I suppose the bench still interprets the law, but even there you have to wonder what's going on with the Supreme Court, which has lost its mind.

Josie--

The youtube channel is coming slower than I'd anticipated. I'm tired of videos that look and sound like shit. I want quality, goddamnit. And therein lies the problem--I just started learning how to use a camera in April. I've watched a LOT of tutorials about the whole video-making process and STILL find entire concepts where I'm clueless. But I'm getting there. I'm banging out a very identifiable, very old school intro, as well as some touches that I haven't seen anywhere else.

It'd be good if DB got rolling again. That last thing I have time for is setting up a website. Right here is FAR AND AWAY my #1 choice for companion pieces.

A boy can dream....
Jan 6, 2015 at 12:42 PM | Unregistered CommenterCheyenne
(" It'd be good if DB got rolling again.")

Absolutely, I regularly visit many different sites and together they don't present as much useful unbiased information in a week as the Daily Bail when DB's rolling.

Hope your channel works out to your expectations, I'll be watching for it.
Jan 6, 2015 at 1:29 PM | Unregistered CommenterSagebrush
Aldobrandini / Amschel Bauder

oligarchs sell judging through puppets,
replacing democracy

monopoly sold for protection

bauder=rothschild (red shield)

The French equivalent: Richelieu

Bloomberg - Bratton: reinterpret the Constitution

Except, Pope Francis sends end using scapegoating
using sexual insecurity, thus attempting to repair history.

Murdoch / Rothschild / Eitam (Effie Eitam:)

"Eitam called the Palestinians "dark forces" and said "We will have to kill them all..."
Jan 19, 2015 at 12:09 AM | Unregistered CommenterJohn Wanamaker
Fat Larry on CNBSucks this week in Davos. F'n hilarious and scary. Kernen presses Fat L on a flat US economy. Fat's rhetorical response: "why do you think the stock market has tripled in 5 years, Joe?" Fat knows his Masters well. And to think he was his nose hair from Fed chief...

DRhatigan said it best years ago: "the powers that be care nothing for main street, the middle class, or even America. They care only for stealing as much as they can as fast as they can. We are witnessing the greatest theft in mankind's history."

Has anything changed in the world?
Jan 23, 2015 at 1:42 PM | Unregistered CommenterJosie
Jan 23, 2015 at 2:13 PM | Unregistered CommenterJosie
Jan 23, 2015 at 3:07 PM | Unregistered CommenterJosie
@ Josie, What I want to know is how Fat Larry and his pals at DE Shaw and the renewable outfits associated with certain pipeline and oil companies are making out on low oil prices (among a few other things).

Here is the link to Fat Larry you mentioned in your first post for all those to see. (with apologies)….

http://www.cnbc.com/id/102358918
Jan 23, 2015 at 7:00 PM | Unregistered Commenterjohn
Jan 24, 2015 at 11:01 AM | Unregistered CommenterSkinflint
Looks like her managed distraction career is over. She made it to the Congressional FED varsity squad.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-02-10/warren-opposes-congressional-meddling-audit-fed-bill
Feb 10, 2015 at 11:08 PM | Unregistered CommenterSagebrush
I've FINALLY gotten my youtube channel up and posted my first video--hell yes in full HD--tonight.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SfTfsWhZi5E

This one ("Who's blowtorching American jobs?") goes after the Federal Reserve.

The next one (at least the next "feature") will attack the myth that's been the bane of this site since its inception.
Feb 25, 2015 at 10:16 PM | Unregistered CommenterCheyenne
@Cheyenne

Well done and good luck with your channel! I will follow it and look forward to your next feature. I note that you have 350+ thumbs up already, without even one thumbs down. That's unusual for a YouTube channel start up, I imagine, especially given the nuts and trolls who live there.

As an aside, you may remember during our many back/forths on the Bail, that Jon Hilsenrath, the WSJ reporter who you show in your piece as an example of the Fed's mouthpieces in the media, is my Duke fraternity brother, class of '89. Funny story: our 25th reunion was last year and I of course ran into Hilsy as many of my frat bros were there. The first thing he said to me was "I don't want to talk about The Fed, Josie!" I have been sending him notes for years, and even copied him on Bail links re: The Fed and how it's destroying our country, saving and enriching a few of the financial elite, while all the actors in this tragedy are protected by the DOJ. He avoided me like the plague that weekend and whispered to others that I was some conspiracy nut job. He now refuses to answer any of my emails.

Keep up the good work. Maybe some day folks will listen to you like they did Mark Pittman and do now with the likes of David Stockman et al. He'll, even Ron Paul directed a shining halogen at The Fed and people began to ask questions, at least for a while.
Feb 26, 2015 at 4:59 PM | Unregistered CommenterJosie
Thanks, Josie. God, not only is that story priceless, it fills my heart with glee for sticking it to Hilsenmouth. I'd actually banished your connection to him from my memory. The hell with that guy.

Pittman knew the score. His FOIA lawsuit was an absolutely hilarious stick in the eye of TPTB. Not only did he win, but the Fed's argument that it deserved FOIA immunity based on the supposedly dire consequences of disclosure went down in flames. Frankly, it was really after that happen that you saw the criminal elite ramp up its expansion of executive power. Probably a coincidence, but you never know.

Stockman is one of the few "names" who understands that the Chicken Little bailout narrative was false from the start. God, would I love to interview him about some stuff he's said...
Feb 26, 2015 at 8:33 PM | Unregistered CommenterCheyenne
Stockman was interesting to listen to when he was on the stump for his new book. Just an awesome listen each time.
Feb 26, 2015 at 8:57 PM | Unregistered Commenterskinflint
Hey C, Just have been wondering here of late. You have stated before that it was your impression that there was organised syndicates behind the onslaught of home loans that went belly up. Have you done any research on this. Seems totally plausible to me. I just can't wrap my mind around a bunch of slobs such as myself destabilizing the whole world with this kind of behavior. Also got to thinking about these bank hacks. Who better to perpetrate this type of crime than the banks themselves. Don't know if anyone else has gotten wind of any of this.
Feb 26, 2015 at 10:07 PM | Unregistered Commenterskinflint
@cheyenne

Not sure I stuck it to Hilsy, but he must know he's a whore, and an underpaid whore at that. Hope he bathes every night to wash off the excrement that he immerses himself in every day at work while "covering" the whorehouse and den of thieves...
Feb 27, 2015 at 9:33 AM | Unregistered CommenterJosie
skin--

If you haven't seen "The Untouchables," by Martin Smith at PBS Frontline, you really should. It's pure dynamite...

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/untouchables/

I made couple of follow-up videos to the Untouchables when I was helping a friend set up his own youtube channel (which is where I really started learning the ropes of video production):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BkQQoGUj6VY (part 1)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KW4o2eRvzx4 (part 2)

I'll get to the global syndicate of banks behind this crap on my own channel in due course...
Feb 28, 2015 at 1:14 PM | Unregistered CommenterCheyenne
No need to state the obvious here. I would like to know what these people have in their closets. Must be something. http://wallstreetonparade.com/2015/03/two-prominent-judges-take-bizarre-action-in-occupy-wall-street-case/
Mar 7, 2015 at 11:18 AM | Unregistered Commenterskinflint

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
All HTML will be escaped. Hyperlinks will be created for URLs automatically.