Video: TARP On Steroids: Brad Sherman Questions Tim Geithner
(Videos Are Below...These Are Screenshots)
Brad Sherman on Too Big to Fail:
- "They've created this new religion that involves genuflecting in the direction of Wall St. and believing this idea that, Oh my God, if those institutions don't get what they want, we're all gonna be fighting for rat meat in the streets."
It's time for a return visit from the Sherminator, destroyer of Mark Haynes and Erin Burnett, righter of bailout wrongs, incredibly massive thorn in Geithner's side. The clip is from September 23 when Timmmaaay sat in front of the House Financial Services Committee to talk financial regulatory reform. If you know Sherman, you know that he always hates how Geithner avoids his questions and wastes his allotted 5 minutes. This is but one more hilarious exchange between these two as the Treasury head evades and obfuscates while Sherman's blood boils.
Don't let my introduction fool you however, this is no laughing matter and you're gonna be pretty pissed off when you hear what's up for discussion. And for those of you who care about such things, Sherman is officially a Democrat from California, though he's 100% anti-bailout, street-fighter, with a little Dalai Lama built-in to impress the ladies back in the disctrict.
Watch (video is below)
If you support our cause then PLEASE re-tweet our stories when you visit. It takes about 5 seconds and is something simple you can do that really makes a difference.
***************************
Sherman's simple question:
- Would you oppose a ONE TRILLION DOLLAR limit on rescuing Too Big To Fail Firms in the future?
******************************
2 More Videos And Commentary Below
(Of the 2 CNBC clips, this is the more important one)
Airtime: Mon. Sept. 14 2009 | 1:30 PM ET
President Obama calling for financial regulatory reform on the anniversary of Lehman Brothers' collapse, with Rep. Brad Sherman, D-Calif.; Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah; and CNBC's Bill Griffeth.
Airtime: Fri. Jul. 24 2009 | 12:20 PM ET
Rep. Jeb Hensarling, (R-TX) and Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA) share their perspectives on Treasury Secretary Geithner and Fed Chairman Bernanke's testimony.
******************************
Extra-Angry Bonus Commentary provided by James H:
Damn you, Daily Bail. Just when I was starting to mellow out for an hour or two (ok, ok, it was only 25 minutes, but you see my point). Just when I was starting to mellow out, I get m********f********* Geithner up here refusing to answer my man Sherman's question. I'm just wondering, but what happens if a Congressman says something like, "Answer my gdamn question, boy, or I'm gonna jump this dais and kick your m*****f******* ass" ? Cause that's pretty much where I'd be at that point. I swear -- I'm not just blowing off steam -- but I seriously think Ivy-League pinhead Geithner has some serious mental issues. I mean, who can't answer a simple question like that?
It's not even a gotcha-type question. It's just a simple question that brings you closer to the god's honest truth. I suppose that's why G-boy doesn't like it -- he can't stand or handle the truth. It hurts, it burns -- and it gets all the f*** up in the way of your devious little plans.Anyhow, this is all the more reason for having a tax revolt. And that revolt should come with thousands of personal letters written to Geithner himself explaining why we won't be subsidizing his bankster buddies any longer.
Folks, you do realize that a significant portion (not the largest part, mind you) will go to ensure that Blankfein and Dimon and Lewis and Pandit et al. AND their retarded bondholders, don't lose a dime. I mean, it's one thing to have your tax dollars be used to slaughter innocents abroad. Some might argue that that's what tax dollars are mainly for. But it's another thing entirely to have your tax dollars go to support people who are much, much wealthier than you are. Those taxes you pay rerpresent hours on the job, whatever it is. In other words, paying your taxes next year means that for part of the year you worked and slaved so that some banker could continue to collect his paycheck from the bankrupt institution he works for.
Personally, I'm not OK with that. In fact, I'm pretty m******* f***** far from OK with that. Just remember when you write that check to the US Treasury next year, that you're writing it to this punk ^, who won't answer any of your representatives questions and who wants the authority to give the banks (or their bondholders) even MORE of your money. Don't do it.
*****************************
Click To Scroll Our List Of Recent Stories
Thank you!
***************************
(If you're one of our 13,000 daily readers by RSS and email who don't visit the site, then you probably don't know that we put all of the day's relevant articles and links into our comment sections. If you like political, economic, and market related news, then click through to our stories and see what we're linking.)
Additional Note To Email Subscribers Only: Feedburner (our email delivery system) will not put videos in the email you receive daily. That is why we put the giant 'Watch' in every story with a video. Just click it and you will arrive at the right page with your video ready for viewing. Hopefully, this clears up some of your confusion. Thank you.
Get All The Stories & Video In One Email Everyday (Yes, of course it's FREE)
Thank you!
Oct 6, 2009 at 12:05 AM
Reader Comments (26)
Anyhow, this is all the more reason for having a tax revolt. And that revolt should come with thousands of personal letters written to Geithner himself explaining why we won't be subsidizing his bankster buddies any longer. Folks, you do realize that a significant portion (not the largest part, mind you) will go to ensure that Blankfein and Dimon and Lewis and Pandit et al. AND their retarded bondholders, don't lose a dime. I mean, it's one thing to have your tax dollars be used to slaughter innocents abroad. Some might argue that that's what tax dollars are mainly for. But it's another thing entirely to have your tax dollars go to support people who are much, much wealthier than you are. Those taxes you pay rerpresent hours on the job, whatever it is. In other words, paying your taxes next year means that for part of the year you worked and slaved so that some banker could continue to collect his paycheck from the bankrupt institution he works for. Personally, I'm not OK with that. In fact, I'm pretty m******* f***** far from OK with that. Just remember when you write that check to the US Treasury next year, that you're writing it to this punk ^, who won't answer any of your representatives questions and who wants the authority to give the banks (or their bondholders) even MORE of your money. Don't do it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rWOn1dFmFds
Ving Rhames...pulp fiction...
Spidey if you're out there reading, this would be a good time to say hello...we know how you like this pulp fiction clip.
Gore Vidal: ‘We’ll have a dictatorship soon in the US’
The grand old man of letters Gore Vidal claims America is ‘rotting away’ — and don’t expect Barack Obama to save it
http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/the_way_we_live/article6854221.ece
http://www.cnbc.com/id/33186083
Gulf States in Secret Talks on Replacing US Dollar for Oil: Report
http://www.cnbc.com/id/33185885
Dow Will Fall to 6,300 by Year End: Portfolio Manager
http://www.cnbc.com/id/33179408
Fed's Dudley Says Interest Rates to Stay Low
http://www.cnbc.com/id/33185584
Nicely done, Brad Sherman.
Jesus! It's like watching an eight-year old insisting the dog ate his homework every time he testifies. We're freaking doomed!
Larry Summers and the White House economic team.
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/10/12/091012fa_fact_lizza
Serious inside piece from the New Yorker.
http://www.reuters.com/article/ousivMolt/idUSTRE5914V520091002
Update on AIG from Benmosche
http://bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a7zAlfcRYqi4
Guaranteed by the FDIC!
http://fridayinvegas.blogspot.com/2009/09/guaranteed-by-fdic.html
STATE SLAPS DR. DO-GOOD
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/regional/state_slaps_dr_do_good_SkzPo06w424s4Jf7BXzk2K
Schwarzenegger Asked to Terminate Prostitute Web Site
http://www.cnbc.com/id/32981680/
Most voters don't want 'EU President Tony Blair', Times poll shows
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6861699.ece
http://www.vanityfair.com/online/daily/2009/09/andrew-ross-sorkin-too.html
What do you think would have happened had Morgan Stanley’s Mitsubishi deal not gone through?
If the Mitsubishi deal had not gone through, I truly believe that Morgan Stanley would have either gone by the wayside like Lehman Brothers, probably putting so much pressure on Goldman that it may have toppled as well, and we would have seen even greater havoc in the marketplace. Now, there was always the possibility—it was never really raised that weekend, or at least not aloud—about whether the government at that point would have decided to step in itself and put capital into Morgan Stanley the same way they did AIG. But barring a capital injection, Morgan Stanley would have died, then Goldman Sachs— and then General Electric.
http://www.vanityfair.com/online/politics/2009/09/vf-daily-in-your-own.html
But how do we get the bondholders to the table? Isn't the govt really powerless without Geithner's proposal for a new, super-duper "resolution authority" ? No, actually. Here's how it works. As Whalen has pointed out on several occasions, the govt already has the authority to replace the board of directors at the failed banks. Since we need management to agree to the restructure the debt (i.e. with the bondholders), the govt can either use the threat of dismissal to "persuade" the board, or they can actually replace them with a handpicked board committed to restructuring the bank. Ideally, management would be able to bring the bondholders to the table, have them agree to swap some of their debt for equity, and then you would have a clean, fully functional money center bank that could support the economy rather than having a half-dead zombie that continues to drain us of our economic lifeblood.
So why haven't we already taken this sensible path? "If we had regulators in Washington who had any guts and any imagination, and they weren't all a bunch of economists, by the way, you could sit down with management and have a restructuring short of bankruptcy," Whalen says. "It's a lack of political will. Unfortunately, Tim Geithner, [and] some of the other players, don't have any corporate finance background so they don't understand this."
http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticker/article/349317/Citi-BofA-Still-Face-Huge-Losses-Bondholders-Must-Share-Taxpayers%E2%80%99-Pain?tickers=BAC,C,JPM,WFC,XLF,SKF,FAS
Great to see you back.
Let's face it, it's embarrassing when the masters of the Universe have to come begging to Joe Sixpack, then the CEO of Goldman has to threaten martial law, Congress pees itself and gives them the money, and Google is charged with the task of erasing the CSpan tapes documenting what a bunch of stupid cowards we've got steering the ship.....
It's just easier on everybody who's not a real taxpayer to do it this way.
Certainly Chris Whalen's most recent article would back up the notion that $700 Billion hasn't really stabilized anything.
DB, I know your really busy, but could you identify what legislation they are discussing?....this should be front page news (nice job once again, MSM).
The Honorable Timmy G (and honor him you will) was presenting 600 pages of feces alternatively known as "The Administration’s Proposals for Financial Regulatory Reform".
http://www.house.gov/apps/list/hearing/financialsvcs_dem/fchr1_092309.shtml
http://www.treas.gov/press/releases/tg296.htm
I doubt this language will be made public until a draft bill is presented.
Sherman's thoughts on the hearing...should explain a lot
http://thehill.com/special-reports/finance-sept-2009/60067-geithner-rejects-1-trillion-limit-on-bailout-power
Section 1204 is unlimited in dollar amount and is a permanent grant of power to the executive branch. TARP contained some limits on executive compensation and an array of special oversight authorities. Section 1204 contains absolutely no limits on executive compensation and no special oversight.
After digesting my contempt of Geithner, and exuberance over Spidey's return, I started thinking about what this clip means. And that is that this train wreck is nowhere near over. Giethner is trying to get the next round of bailouts "pre-approved", and this time around, they truly want a blank check (as in absolutely no freaking limits whatsoever).
You nailed it.
Here's a bit more from Sherman on this...
http://bradsherman.house.gov/list/press/ca27_sherman/morenews/92309GeithnerReject.html
http://dailybail.com/home/guest-post-from-analyst-chris-whalen-bank-of-americas-equity.html
http://www.vanityfair.com/business/features/2009/11/too-big-to-fail-excerpt-200911?printable=true