Dodd's resignation is a win for guys like you. I know a lot of people are cynical, but if you keep the pressure on, one by one creeps like Dodd will be sent packing. Who knows, maybe someday the department of justice will step in and start doing their job (could happen).
It reminds me of a scene from "Stand by Me":
Ace: What are you gonna do? Shoot us all? Gordie: No, Ace. Just you.
If you can pick off the worst offenders first (and Dodd is certainly one of them), you can win the war.
CHRIS DODD: CRIMINAL HARD CORE SUPPORTER OF BERNANKE & TIM
Geithner's Disgrace The new AIG report reveals how the Treasury secretary—and U.S. taxpayers—were fleeced by Wall Street banks. By Eliot Spitzer, Slate
The issue has been festering for months: Why were AIG's counterparties—including Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, and UBS—paid 100 cents on the dollar when the feds rescued the insurance giant, helping raise the cost of the bailout to nearly $200 billion? A new report issued by Special Inspector General Neil Barofsky now reveals that government officials, notably then-New York Fed President and current Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, grievously damaged the nation and capitulated to the very banks they should have been supervising.
Barofsky's report reads like a case study in failed negotiation. The New York Fed didn't have the backbone to stand up to Wall Street, didn't understand its capacity to protect taxpayers, and didn't appreciate that its responsibility was to taxpayers.
Geithner and the Fed have proffered a series of spurious reasons for their willingness to pay AIG's counterparties—the leading Wall Street banks—in full while demanding concessions from every other entity with whom the Treasury or the Fed dealt. Geithner suggested he could not use the threat of AIG's default in the absence of a federal bailout to get concessions from AIG's creditors. Why not?
That is exactly what the government did with the auto industry, and rightly so. The entity providing financing to a near-bankrupt institution must always seek contributions from everyone else at risk. The fact that the Fed had a strong predisposition against letting AIG go into bankruptcy didn't mean the Fed shouldn't have used every opportunity to wrangle concessions from the other parties. For Geithner to say it would have been "unethical" to negotiate for concessions is sheer silliness. It is akin to saying that having decided that you are willing to pay up to $250,000 for a house, it is unethical to negotiate to buy it for $225,000.
Geithner also claims that using the possibility of AIG's default as a negotiating opportunity would have cast doubt on the government's commitment to financial stability. What? Seeking to get other parties to share the burden demonstrates a lack of commitment to restoring financial stability and market-based realities? Pressuring Goldman and the other counterparties to offer concessions would have forced them to absorb the consequences of making suspect deals with an insurance company that was essentially a Ponzi scheme. Forcing them to give concessions would have been one small step toward ending the moral hazard the Fed had allowed to flourish for years. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=114x72702
If Gaithner has to step down (possible to likely) will Larry Summers be ...... for his housekeeper and fraudulently deducting summer camp fees for his kids. ...
$180 BILLION....no wonder they're telling Gaithner to pound sand about his ...... "Don't blame Tim...this was here when he got here just like our deficit ...
Please STOP telling everyone how corrupt, incompetent and self-serving Chris Dudd is, because this is the United States of America and spreading info like that only makes him seem like PRESIDENTIAL MATERIAL.
You damn right I Tiny Tim Geithner ran the greatest Ponzi Scheme through Goldman Sachs and left you the idiot tax payer holding the bag with a worthless shell company called AIG.
So what the cat is out of the bag, me and my croonies in the government and at Goldman are rich! What are you stupid complacent sheeple going to do about my blatant corruption...call the Fed on me LOL!!!!! Helicopter Ben is on it too you idiots. You losers can not and will not do a thing in stopping our corrupt ways. Geithner's NY Fed told AIG to keep quiet on deals Under Geithner, NY Fed told AIG to keep mum on billions paid to Goldman and others http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Geithners-NY-Fed-told-AIG-to-apf-255672802.html?x=0&sec=topStories&pos=1&asset=&ccode=
Simon Johnson: We're Setting Ourselves Up For A Big Catastrophe, 'Crisis Is Just Beginning' (VIDEO) Simon Johnson, the MIT professor and economist who's long been a strident critic of "too big to fail" institutions, appeared on CNBC this morning and predicted that the next phase of the financial crisis could be precipitated by banks exploiting emerging markets like China.
"We now have a financial system that is completely based on moral hazard," Johnson said. "Crazy things happen when you have a financial system like that."
Johnson rebutted the recent sunny predictions of new Bank Of America CEO Brian Moniyhan, who said the bank's economists are predicting U.S. GDP will grow at a 3 percent pace next year.
Here's Johnson: "The conventional wisdom is you can't have back-to-back major financial crises. I think we're going to push that, we're going to have a look and see whether that's true. And the next 12 months could really be exciting. People could be very positive, but we are setting ourselves up for an enormous catastrophe."
The emerging markets are the next phase of the crisis, Johnson predicted, as large banks look to unload risk on frothy foreign investments. The banks' risk-taking, Johnson argues, is fueled by their belief that the government has shown it will bail out huge financial institutions.
Here's more from Johnson: "....For the six major banks of the United States, their total balance sheet is over 60 percent of U.S. GDP. [The banks] got bigger during the crisis. All the big guys are out there looking to take risk. So would you -- and so would I -- if we felt we were immune. If you had a 'get out of jail free card,' wouldn't you go take a lot risk right now?"
Argentina Central Bank Mutiny Costs Local Bernanke Equivalent His Job, Criminal Charges A surreal harbinger of what may well transpire in the US some day was today's firing of the president of Argentina's Central Bank Martin Redrado by president Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner. The action followed his refusal to release reserves to the government to be used for debt service payments, as well as his refusal to resign. At least in Argentina the Central Bank is answerable to the president, instead of the other way around http://www.zerohedge.com/article/argentina-central-bank-mutiny-costs-local-bernanke-equivalent-his-job-criminal-charges
To begin on an optimistic note: It's actually a lot better in America than it was in the past. They don't call those guys, Fisk, Rockefeller, Gould, ..... Robber Barons for nothing.
Traditionally there have been at least four ways to react to this nonsense.
The first and most popular seems to be to join in on the fun and smash your enemies while enriching yourself by every means possible.
The second is to stand on the sidelines, and on ethical principles, and to moralize in any way possible. Satire and humor seem to be the methods of choice but righteous indignation is popular too, such as that of idealistic but ineffective politicians and activists like Bernie Sanders and Ralph Nader.
The third way is to try, desperately sometimes, to ignore the corruption and get on with our own lives.
However, and we don't need the examples of Hitler and Stalin to know this: Sometimes it becomes impossible to ignore them and then we are forced to fall back on 1) and 2) or, 3) to go underground, or leave the country.
Even though I prefer to ignore them, I keep an eye on them because I've learned from history that if you wait too long 3) is no longer an option.
By the way Chris, leave behind the millions you've made and the $150k pension you stole. They'll replace him with the MA AG and say he's a different kind of Democrat. These crooks suddenly deciding that now is the time to take the money and run should be escorted straight to Guantanimo.
tubby...you bring up a good point...we need to figure out a way to DIMINISH the influence of lobbying...once diminished there will be less demand for former politicians to cash in once they retire from Congress...
Reader Comments (20)
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/business/6802019.html
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100106/ap_on_bi_ge/us_health_care_overhaul
http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-and-world/la-naw-airline-terror7-2010jan07,0,2084702.story
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/07/nyregion/07state.html
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7504f472-fae9-11de-94d8-00144feab49a.html
Dodd's resignation is a win for guys like you. I know a lot of people are cynical, but if you keep the pressure on, one by one creeps like Dodd will be sent packing. Who knows, maybe someday the department of justice will step in and start doing their job (could happen).
It reminds me of a scene from "Stand by Me":
Ace: What are you gonna do? Shoot us all?
Gordie: No, Ace. Just you.
If you can pick off the worst offenders first (and Dodd is certainly one of them), you can win the war.
Next Target: Bernanke.....
Geithner's Disgrace
The new AIG report reveals how the Treasury secretary—and U.S. taxpayers—were fleeced by Wall Street banks.
By Eliot Spitzer, Slate
The issue has been festering for months: Why were AIG's counterparties—including Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, and UBS—paid 100 cents on the dollar when the feds rescued the insurance giant, helping raise the cost of the bailout to nearly $200 billion? A new report issued by Special Inspector General Neil Barofsky now reveals that government officials, notably then-New York Fed President and current Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, grievously damaged the nation and capitulated to the very banks they should have been supervising.
Barofsky's report reads like a case study in failed negotiation. The New York Fed didn't have the backbone to stand up to Wall Street, didn't understand its capacity to protect taxpayers, and didn't appreciate that its responsibility was to taxpayers.
Geithner and the Fed have proffered a series of spurious reasons for their willingness to pay AIG's counterparties—the leading Wall Street banks—in full while demanding concessions from every other entity with whom the Treasury or the Fed dealt. Geithner suggested he could not use the threat of AIG's default in the absence of a federal bailout to get concessions from AIG's creditors. Why not?
That is exactly what the government did with the auto industry, and rightly so. The entity providing financing to a near-bankrupt institution must always seek contributions from everyone else at risk. The fact that the Fed had a strong predisposition against letting AIG go into bankruptcy didn't mean the Fed shouldn't have used every opportunity to wrangle concessions from the other parties. For Geithner to say it would have been "unethical" to negotiate for concessions is sheer silliness. It is akin to saying that having decided that you are willing to pay up to $250,000 for a house, it is unethical to negotiate to buy it for $225,000.
Geithner also claims that using the possibility of AIG's default as a negotiating opportunity would have cast doubt on the government's commitment to financial stability. What? Seeking to get other parties to share the burden demonstrates a lack of commitment to restoring financial stability and market-based realities? Pressuring Goldman and the other counterparties to offer concessions would have forced them to absorb the consequences of making suspect deals with an insurance company that was essentially a Ponzi scheme. Forcing them to give concessions would have been one small step toward ending the moral hazard the Fed had allowed to flourish for years.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=114x72702
Where does Tim Geithner belong?
Cabinet
Prison
http://althouse.blogspot.com/2009/01/tim-geithner-does-he-belong-in-cabinet.html
If Gaithner has to step down (possible to likely) will Larry Summers be ...... for his housekeeper and fraudulently deducting summer camp fees for his kids. ...
$180 BILLION....no wonder they're telling Gaithner to pound sand about his ...... "Don't blame Tim...this was here when he got here just like our deficit ...
http://www.minyanville.com/articles/timothy-geithner-speech-american-saving-irresponsible-crisis-stock-market-crash-bailout-minyanville/index/a/25985
OLD but scams revealed:
http://criminalstate.com/tag/tim-geithner/
You damn right I Tiny Tim Geithner ran the greatest Ponzi Scheme through Goldman Sachs and left you the idiot tax payer holding the bag with a worthless shell company called AIG.
So what the cat is out of the bag, me and my croonies in the government and at Goldman are rich! What are you stupid complacent sheeple going to do about my blatant corruption...call the Fed on me LOL!!!!! Helicopter Ben is on it too you idiots. You losers can not and will not do a thing in stopping our corrupt ways.
Geithner's NY Fed told AIG to keep quiet on deals
Under Geithner, NY Fed told AIG to keep mum on billions paid to Goldman and others
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Geithners-NY-Fed-told-AIG-to-apf-255672802.html?x=0&sec=topStories&pos=1&asset=&ccode=
Simon Johnson, the MIT professor and economist who's long been a strident critic of "too big to fail" institutions, appeared on CNBC this morning and predicted that the next phase of the financial crisis could be precipitated by banks exploiting emerging markets like China.
"We now have a financial system that is completely based on moral hazard," Johnson said. "Crazy things happen when you have a financial system like that."
Johnson rebutted the recent sunny predictions of new Bank Of America CEO Brian Moniyhan, who said the bank's economists are predicting U.S. GDP will grow at a 3 percent pace next year.
Here's Johnson:
"The conventional wisdom is you can't have back-to-back major financial crises. I think we're going to push that, we're going to have a look and see whether that's true. And the next 12 months could really be exciting. People could be very positive, but we are setting ourselves up for an enormous catastrophe."
The emerging markets are the next phase of the crisis, Johnson predicted, as large banks look to unload risk on frothy foreign investments. The banks' risk-taking, Johnson argues, is fueled by their belief that the government has shown it will bail out huge financial institutions.
Here's more from Johnson:
"....For the six major banks of the United States, their total balance sheet is over 60 percent of U.S. GDP. [The banks] got bigger during the crisis. All the big guys are out there looking to take risk. So would you -- and so would I -- if we felt we were immune. If you had a 'get out of jail free card,' wouldn't you go take a lot risk right now?"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLKuXwisOrc&feature=player_embedded
A surreal harbinger of what may well transpire in the US some day was today's firing of the president of Argentina's Central Bank Martin Redrado by president Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner. The action followed his refusal to release reserves to the government to be used for debt service payments, as well as his refusal to resign. At least in Argentina the Central Bank is answerable to the president, instead of the other way around
http://www.zerohedge.com/article/argentina-central-bank-mutiny-costs-local-bernanke-equivalent-his-job-criminal-charges
Traditionally there have been at least four ways to react to this nonsense.
The first and most popular seems to be to join in on the fun and smash your enemies while enriching yourself by every means possible.
The second is to stand on the sidelines, and on ethical principles, and to moralize in any way possible. Satire and humor seem to be the methods of choice but righteous indignation is popular too, such as that of idealistic but ineffective politicians and activists like Bernie Sanders and Ralph Nader.
The third way is to try, desperately sometimes, to ignore the corruption and get on with our own lives.
However, and we don't need the examples of Hitler and Stalin to know this: Sometimes it becomes impossible to ignore them and then we are forced to fall back on 1) and 2) or, 3) to go underground, or leave the country.
Even though I prefer to ignore them, I keep an eye on them because I've learned from history that if you wait too long 3) is no longer an option.
it seems most of us are firmly in the #3 camp...some in camp 2