TPM Muckraker

« previous | MUCK HOME | next »

Who's Running TARP? You Might Not Wanna Know

Last week, Congress's oversight panel for the TARP funds confirmed in a report that the Treasury Department essentially has no idea what banks have done with the astronomical sums they've been handed.

Given this lack of information, we figured it might at least be helpful to know a bit about a few of the people at Treasury who are in charge of administering the massive program, and what their backgrounds might tell us about the way they've gone about it.

As the New York Times reported back in October, many of those people are former execs at Goldman Sachs, the Wall Street behemoth that used to be led by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson.

Most prominent among those is Neel Kashkari, the 35-year old former Goldman VP who was appointed by Paulson in October as the interim head of the Office of Financial Stability (OFS), which is in charge of implementing the bailout. Kashkari's role is said by the Times to have "evolved" after Paulson changed the original bailout plan, so that Treasury would invest money directly in troubled banks.

But less attention has been paid to another Goldman alum, Kendrick Wilson, who was brought in -- after a personal call from his old Harvard Business School buddy, George W. Bush -- to advise Paulson on how to fix the financial markets.

Paulson brought Wilson to Goldman in 1998 from Lazard Freres. Before that, Wilson was president of Ranieri & Co., which was established by Lew Ranieri. While at Solomon Brothers in the 1970s, Ranieri pioneered mortgage-backed securities, the exotic financial instruments that helped stoke the mortgage bubble. In other words, the man brought in to fend off a financial crisis appears to be a protege of one of the men who helped cause it.

One Treasury official described Wilson to the Washington Post as "somebody who already knows everybody on Wall Street." The Wall Street Journal reported back in July:

Wilson's imprint has been on many major deals of the current crisis. As part of Goldman's team, he advised National City on its recent investment led by Corsair Capital. Wilson also advised Bank of America on its takeover of Countrywide Financial. He is advising Wachovia on its options for its loan portfolio.

palinAnd get this: because Wilson was hired by Treasury as a contractor, he won't have to file his financial holdings. So there's no way to know how much stock in Goldman he holds.

According to a Goldman spokesman, Wilson retired from the firm when he signed on with the Treasury. Some news reports over the summer said that Wilson was supposed to stay at Treasury only until January 1 2009. We asked the department whether Wilson is still there, and will let you know what we find out.

But Wilson is far from the only top bailout official who hasn't received the attention he or she deserves. Another senior adviser to Paulson, according to the Times, is David Nason, the department's assistant secretary for financial institutions. Before that, Nason served as lead counsel to SEC commissioner Paul Atkins.

Who is Atkins? Portfolio magazine described him in October as the commissioner who pushed hardest to limit the agency's regulatory scope. A friend of Atkins' told the magazine: "If you surprised Paul and asked him what he really thinks of the S.E.C., he'd probably say, 'Blow it up.' "

And now Atkins' former top lawyer is advising Paulson on the bailout.

Then there's Robert Hoyt, described by the Times as having "worked around the clock in recent weeks to make sure the department's unprecedented moves pass legal muster."

As a White House associate counsel before he came to Treasury, Hoyt appears to have been a bit player in the US Attorney firings scandal. According to an Associated Press story, (via Nexis), at the request of DOJ's Kyle Sampson, the point man on the firings, Hoyt called the GOP co-chair of a committee that vetted judicial applicants in Washington state, pushing the application of John McKay, one of the US Attorneys who ultimately was fired. (McKay was not ultimately appointed to the bench.) Needless to say, Hoyt didn't raise a peep in protest at the firings scheme.

And overseeing Treasury's public response to the crisis has been Michele Davis,
a former "senior vice president of regulatory policy," in other words, a lobbyist, for Fannie Mae -- the troubled mortgage giant whose collapse helped precipitate the crisis. Before that, the woman running PR for a $700 billion government program was an aide to Dick Armey, the former GOP congressman and small government champion.

It's also worth noting a few more of the top Treasury officials running the program -- even those with less eyebrow-raising backgrounds.

James Lambright, TARP's interim chief investment officer, was head of the Export-Import Bank of the US since 2005, and before that was at Credit Suisse, where he specialized in real estate banking. While at treasury, Lambright retains his position as head of Ex-Im Bank.

Lambright's former colleague at the Export-Import Ban, Howard Schweitzer, is now the TARP's chief operating officer.

Don McLellan, who, according to a recent speech by Kashkari (via Nexis) is serving as the TARP's Capital Purchase Program Manager, is a former senior VP at Motorola, specializing in mergers and acquisitions, private equity investments, corporate restructurings, and IPOs.

Another former Goldman alum also advising Paulson is Dan Jester, who is said to be an expert in financial institutions. According to the Wall Street Journal, Jester played a key role in shaping the takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

And Steve Shafran, yet another former Goldmanite who forged a tight relationship with Paulson while in Asia for the firm in the 1990s, has been helping to shape the Treasury's effort to guarantee money market funds, among other things. Before he retired from Goldman six years ago, Shafran was an expert in corporate restructuring.


42 Comments

| Leave a comment
user-pic

Uuuuhhhh. It's like having amoebic dysentery in my mind.

user-pic

Excellent reporting but two comments on suggestions you make that I think lack evidence:

1. I don't think it's fair to ascribe Kendrick Wilson having worked awhile ago with Lew Ranieri, the guy who pioneered mortgage-backed securities a long time ago, as having much of anything to do with the current issues of MBS, like over-leveraging and poor risk management. It's kind of like blaming Gutenberg for Jayson Blair.

Wilson not having to release his financial holdings is FAR, far more troubling.

2. From what I can tell, there's no indication that Robert Hoyt knew anything about the U.S. Attorney scandal, and helping one of the U.S. Attorneys who eventually got fired try to get nominated to be a federal judge is sort of the opposite of being involved.

user-pic

The media in this country is a joke. Paulson has zero accountability and just doesn't give a sh*t because the press is not jumping on his head to demand greater transparency. I'm getting a sour taste in my mouth-- just like the resolution to go to war in Iraq. No questions asked. That's the US press for you. Asleep at the switch as always.

user-pic

Thank God we have those rabid dog Democrats getting after this or you'd have to think Geedumya and Co. were going to get away with the greatest hiest in the history of the planet, oh wait....

user-pic

Yep. There are no excuses for the Democratic leadership. Where is Reid on this? Do your freaking job.
I'm getting sick of this bunch. Congress is one big country club.

user-pic

"That's the US press for you. Asleep at the switch as always."
Posted by rosebowl
---

You must referring to the 'liberal' press. The one that asked sooo many questions about little Sarah and accepted everything, at face value, that came out of McCain's mouth. That US press?

user-pic

No such animal as a liberal press ... they're all in the sack with the repugs. By the way, liberals don't give a $hit about Palin ...her antics are good humor just like the comics - it's funny to see someone so stupid think so highly of herself.

user-pic

I have lately felt prone to believing conspiracy theories.

I just wish they would quit proving themselves to be true.

My more recent CT flash insight reflects back on Naomi Kline's Shock Doctrine, and how that doctrine was used to steal away our Constitution in the wake of 9/11.

So now, here we are, in the wake of the second election cycle in a row demonstrating to the Trickle-Down Elite that their time is coming to an end. To their rescue flowers the very economic meltdown fruit of Reaganomics and deregulation. A shock to the world economy, just in time to rescue the Robber Barons, and just in time to take advantage of the shocked.

"Here," said Paulson. "I have the antidote to this virulent disease. Just give me all your money, and I will give it to my friends (who will hold some back for me when I leave this office), so that when it all comes apart we can live fat and happy in Dubai."

"And you can't ask where I send the money."

That was his original proposal to Congress, and is exactly how he is handling things now.

The only bailout happening right now is to the bloated rich, because it's their last chance to have such free access to the sweat equity of the great unwashed masses.

That, I fear, is exactly what is happening to the "bailout" money this very minute.

The only furtherance of this crime would be if Congress buckled and gave him the rest of the $700 billion.

user-pic


We'll see, and soon.

user-pic

From what I read on Warren Reports, Elizabeth Warren knows the right questions to ask - she's just not getting the cooperation the situation demands. All that changes next week when the next house cleaning crew starts to work. I have the patience to wait. I suspect there'll be a whole new panel seated and the former panel members are gonna be grilled intensely. Good political drama is on the schedule.

user-pic

I'm really not seeing the outrage here.

Is the argument that we should have put people with no experience in financial markets in charge of our $700 billion?

I certainly don't idolize Goldman, but on the other hand I'd rather have people with such experience in charge of TARP than, say, the guy who runs my local credit union.

user-pic

Hey! The "guy" who runs my local credit union is of the female persuasion. She might actually do a better job than the "guys" in charge. I'm pretty sure she cares more about my money than "the guys" at Treasury.

user-pic

Jesus! You are one myopic dude, dude.

user-pic

My credit union is in very good financial shape. They had the sense to avoid the questionable mortgage market.

I trust the people who run it much more than those "professional economists" in Washington who have brought the US finances to this sorry mess.

user-pic

You're suffering from PSC - Palin Simplex Complex.

You ask : ...we should have put people with no experience in financial markets in charge of our $700 billion? ...

Instead, you should have said: ...we should put people in charge with experience in financial markets, but not the one's responsible for our $700 billion bailout of their financial screwup.


user-pic

I agree with all comments so far except Ohio Guy. Don't you get it dude? These guys experience is in STEALING PUBLIC MONIES....so you crave their experience?

THe media is totally silent on all this. THe greatest heist in all of history is occurring, in slo motion, before our very eyes....and the media is saying... hey, lookie over here at what the Obama girls are having for lunch at their school.

The Buuusch Clan is paying off it's benefactors. Wasn't Goldman Sachs the number one donor to the Buuusch prez. campaign in 2000? I believe they were also very high on the list in 2004. They invest millions and the return is Trillions.

user-pic

THE DEFENSE OF NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY: WHAT A NEW PECORA COMMISSION MUST DO

by John Hoefle

The original Pecora Commission, an investigation into the financial machinations which led to the Great Depression, conducted by the Senate Banking and Currency Committee from 1932 to 1934, exposed the way in which a cabal of powerful bankers dominated the U.S. economy, and manipulated it to suit their own goals. The investigation was run by Ferdinand Pecora, a former prosecutor who hauled some of the most prominent bankers in the nation before the committee and revealed them to be, under their pompous, self-righteous veneer, a pack of self-serving, arrogant, and corrupt hyenas who had little regard for the interests of the nation and its people. In doing so, Pecora smashed the myth of public service the bankers and their publicists had so carefully crafted, and helped build the public support President Franklin Roosevelt required to force Congress to pass tough regulatory reforms.

The situation today is even worse than the one faced by FDR. Then, the U.S. still had a strong agro-industrial base and a citizenry which understood that infrastructure and production were the pillars upon which the economy stood. Today, those pillars have been severely weakened by deindustrialization and globalization, and our people blinded by the myth that economics is based upon finance. Rather than hauling the hyenas before Congress to demand answers, our Federal government is lavishing them with money, saving the banks while selling the nation down the river.

If this bailout continues, the United States will cease to exist as a sovereign nation, and become just another satrapy in the imperium. We will have abandoned the promise of the American Revolution, which lifted mankind to a new level of freedom and prosperity, and have fallen back into that against which we fought.

We must once again expose the nature of the financier parasites which infest our economy, so that our people will understand the need to cast them off. To that end, we need a new Pecora Commission.

- The Nature of Empire -

The most pernicious myth about the financial system is that it is basically honest, if corrupted here and there by a few bad apples. The truth is just the opposite: The system itself is corrupt--corruption is the way the empire works, and the empire is what runs the global financial system.

In a recent discussion with his staff, LaRouche stated that "an empire is not based on a nation. An empire is based on being atop of a number of nations. That's an empire. All other uses of the term `empire' are nonsensical. So now we're dealing with the British Empire, which is a Venetian empire, an Anglo-Dutch Liberal/Saudi empire, and these forces, which are the central political elements in there, coordinate all these banking forces.... The empire is this system.''

The operational center of this empire, as LaRouche has defined it, is the City of London, but the empire itself is stateless, with operations in every part of the world, in every financial and political center. LaRouche describes it as a slime-mold which constantly adapts to changes, creating new structures and shedding others to maintain its power.

"The essential slime-mold is the idea of money as having an intrinsic value, either by dictate or by approximation, by evolution. And that you run economies based on money,'' LaRouche said. "Thus, you set up the financial systems, and the financial system has always been the core of every empire from Babylon to the present time. That's the thing that has to be understood--you have to destroy the slime-mold."

- Get Serious -

After every financial crisis there are investigations and prosecutions of high-profile people, designed to persuade the population that the laws are being enforced and the crooks punished, when they are not. Such investigations tend to occur well after the fact, when the activity being investigated has ceased to be profitable, and often involve individuals who are prominent but not particularly important to the empire.

Perhaps the best example of the latter is the prosecution of Martha Stewart for insider trading, in the wake of the stock market crash of 2000. The case garnered huge publicity, allowed for much posturing on the part of regulators, but accomplished little else. It was a classic show trial.

Another good example is the case of Enron, the energy-trading scam which collapsed in 2001. A number of top Enron officials were sent to prison--and rightly so--but the overall investigation and prosecution into the activities of the company was run as a cover-up, to protect those who steered Enron from behind the scenes. This cover-up began with the initial revelations of trouble at the company, through a press campaign which effectively focused public attention on one area of the company's operations, and continued with a special internal company investigation of just that area; that investigation, in turn, became the basis for the Congressional hearings and the Federal prosecutions of company officials. The officials who went to jail were expendable, but so in fact was Enron, which had served much of its purpose.

What Enron really was, was a battering ram to force a deregulation of the electric-power industry, to allow for the creation of a spot-market pricing structure similar to the spot market in crude oil. Enron was largely steered in this imperial endeavor by two banks, Lazard and Rothschild, which had also played major roles in the creation of the oil spot market. Rothschild had a man on Enron's board at the time of the collapse, and one of the two men brought in to handle the company's internal investigation was a former Lazard banker, while the company itself was a long-time Lazard client. With the cover-up in place, the allegations of widespread bribery of public officials to grease the skids for deregulation and other crimes were never investigated, and the controllers of the operation walked away, leaving the insiders to twist in the wind.

Already, we see signs that a similar cover-up is in the works. Lists of targets are appearing in the press, along with sanitized exposé of "what really happened'' at places like Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, and AIG, all of which have the characteristic of blaming forces inside the companies, while hiding the way these companies were operating as creatures of the larger system. The puppets are being thrown to the wolves, while the puppetmasters are protected. If we are to save this nation, it is imperative that the puppetmasters also be exposed.

As LaRouche said, "You don't destroy the empire, by putting some of its members in jail. You destroy the empire, by putting the whole oligarchy in prison!''

- Targets -

One of the prime targets of the Pecora hearings was J.P. Morgan, both the man and the bank. Through its direct and interlocking directorships, Pecora said, Morgan had "incomparably the greatest reach of power in private hands in our entire history.'' The hearings revealed that Morgan maintained what it called "preferred lists'' of powerful men in finance, business, politics, and public life, to whom he would offer securities at less than market value and provide other favors. Morgan insisted that these were simple business transactions, for which he expected nothing in return!

The House of Morgan was, in truth, a British operation from its inception. It began life as George Peabody & Co., a bank founded in London in 1851 by American George Peabody. A few years later, another American, Junius S. Morgan, joined the firm, and upon Peabody's death the firm became J.S. Morgan & Co. Junius Morgan brought in his son, J. Pierpont Morgan, to head the New York office of J.S. Morgan, and the New York office became J.P. Morgan & Co. From its original role in helping the British gain control of American railroads, the Morgan bank became a leading force in the oligarchy's war against the American System, using the deep pockets of its imperial masters to become a powerhouse in not only finance but steel, automobiles, railroads, electricity generation, and other industries.

In taking on Morgan, along with Kuhn Loeb, Chase, National City Bank, and others, Pecora was serving notice to the empire that, in the United States at least, its activities would be subject to the laws of the nation. Pecora's efforts were rewarded with the passage of the Banking Act of 1933, commonly known as Glass-Steagall, which founded the FDIC, and prohibited the mixing of commercial and investment banking. Glass-Steagall forced J.P. Morgan & Co. to break up into two separate companies, the commercial bank J.P. Morgan and the investment bank Morgan Stanley.

Glass-Steagall helped keep the bankers in check, until the 1980s, when its restrictions began to be eroded; by 1999, when the commercial bank-investment bank prohibition was repealed, it was already being ignored. Today, the top U.S. commercial banks are all part of financial conglomerates with heavy investment-banking and related speculative activity. Pulling the proper banking functions out of these monstrosities will require considerable effort.

Just as the original Pecora Commission paved the way for reform by showing the American people the nature of the financial system which triggered the Great Depression, a new Pecora Commission must show the public how the empire foisted deregulation and globalization upon the nation, with the collusion of a corrupted political class. It must show that the so-called "free market'' system is actually a corrupt looting operation which has bankrupted our nation and our people; that the highly touted "financial innovation'' was a fraud; and that only a return to the American System of sovereign credit, regulation, infrastructure, and production can lead us out of this new Dark Age. It won't solve all our problems, but it is a necessary step in the right direction.

user-pic

One of the things you missed is that when JP Morgan dies, it was discovered that he owned less than 20% of JP Morgan. Over 80% was owned by the Rothschilds.

user-pic
a pack of self-serving, arrogant, and corrupt hyenas who had little regard for the interests of the nation and its people

Gosh... I think you've described 8 years of the criminal conspiracy that has been bushco!

Goldman Sachs seems to be the hub of this whole bailout fiasco, does it not? They let their chief opponents fail and made sure they were in charge of the whole potlatch of the nation's wealth.

user-pic

If you would post this as a blog at the Cafe, that would be much appreciated! :)

user-pic

Allow me to propose my conspiracy theory of the day. The free marketers and neocons have long promoted a very weak central government and the Wall Street princes being greedy and the Republican leaders wanting to distract Obama as much as possible, sometime after the primary season was over it was determined that Obama would win the election. Now with all the foresight that lead us into Iraq, these "brilliant" people decided to cause a financial crisis that would take much of Obama's time and energy for a year or two. In addition it would make a lot of people very rich and it would continue to weaken the central government. But of course they didn't think very far beyond lunch and just like Iraq, New Orleans, and half a dozen other events, things got out of hand. When McCain learned of these plans (which were made without his knowledge or permission), he suspended his campaign and rushed back to Washington to plead against them. He lost. Notice the change in his attitude after this series of events. Now we are in the payoff period which must be accomplished before Obama takes office.

So compare the events and responses to Iraq and Wall Street. They are much the same. A lot of people get badly hurt and a few people get very rich. The administration's justifications are much the same. The planners have accomplished their intent even though they allowed things to go beyond the desired state.

user-pic

Good thing your conspiracy theory is only a day thingy. The financial crisis took a number of years to build up - just like an avalanche. All it takes is a small push and it's ruff-n-tumble time on the slopes as all that snow crashes down into the valleys faster than $hit out of a goose.

user-pic

I'm another believer in everyone above but Ohio Guy. First of all, OG, the choices are not robber barons or credit union officials. We could have had Krugman and Stiglitz (sp?). We could have had Elizabeth Warren, about whom I don't know a lot, but she has seemed pretty much on the ball and in the right ball park. For all of his faults, like asking congressmen to pay for their breakfasts, which cooked his goose in Washington, Jimmy Carter would, I bet, have done a good job and the right thing. Same for Nate Silver, who definitely seems to understand numbers. More knowledgeable folks can correct my list, but I'm sure a good list would go on for miles and never touch a single robber baron. I've guessed from the beginning that all of the cash is by now safely out of the country in whatever the current version of Swiss bank accounts may be, and we're never going to see it again. My take away from all this is that I'm never, ever, going to give another dollar to another so-called Dem. I'll go to the polls and vote, although why I'm not quite sure, but I'm going to let the robber barons provide the cash.

user-pic

I'll give you a few clues.

First, the Democrats are not bed with the robber-barons and do not support them.

Second, the repugs are in over their heads with the robber-barons - they rely on them exclusively for their political financial backing and manipulate rules, regulations and laws to curry favor.

So if you don't support the Democrats, then you're supporting the robber-baron thru the repugs running for office.

user-pic

Let's be fair - the guy who invented mortgage-backed securities didn't any more "cause" the current crisis than Prometheus caused the Chicago Fire.

user-pic

Ever see what happens to a car windshield once there's a small crack in it?

Enough said.

user-pic
user-pic

With all due respect, TPM...

Mortgage Backed Securities (MBS) are not "exotic financial instruments." At least, not all of them.

Exotic are the MBS that Wall Street issued from 1999-2007 that were based on pooled subprime mortgages. Subprime mortgages that both Wall Street and the bond rating agencies knew would eventually be worthless, but decided to give those MBS bonds a "AAA" rating anyway becuase that would get the agencies MORE BUSINESS RATING BONDS in the future. Had they issued a bad rating, Wall Street would have gone to another firm.

MBS are not exotic when they are what they should be -- pools of 30 year fixed mortgages that are properly underwritten. That is what Fannie, Freddie, Ginnie and the FHA issued before greedy Wall Street got involved and started selling crap. The 30 year fixed mortgages were nearly as safe as Treasuries.

But Wall Street had to get in on the action, poorly copy the product and destroy the market.

And now the Wall Streeters are pretending to clean it up.

user-pic
At least, not all of them.

It's either an all or none situation - definite maybes are not allowed when it comes to the taxpayer money being used.

If an MBS-type security can be turned into an instrument of financial death-n-destruction, then they all have the potential to be used as such.

It's like saying the pups of a domesticated dog breed with wild wolf will still be a domesticated animal if raised in a domesticated setting - NOT!

user-pic

Unfortunately, we’re now witnessing the bitter harvest of a society that most rewarded those who managed to create of the illusion of a “wealth” that never really existed in the first place. We elevated the profit motive to the point where we could no longer recognize the border between the expectation of a reasonable reward and boundless greed. And we can now correct the problem only by first recognizing and acknowledging its existence.

I have to wonder how it’s possible to determine how to create an economic system that “works” without first agreeing on its goal? Should the goal be to create a system that has the ultimate goal of sustaining as many people in as comfortable a fashion as possible, without also destroying our planet? Or is it the goal of the system to create opportunities that ultimately allow the few far in excess of what their needs require, while the many remain at their mercy and charity?

It seems to me that our thoughts on the creation of a fair economic system are tainted by an undue focus on the potential that in a more egalitarian system there may be some people would not contribute equally. But, in reality, this happens already in our so-called “free market” world. And the results seem much worse than the possibility of supporting a few free-loaders. Very few of those who break their backs doing the hard labor of the world actually receive any benefit beyond their own meager subsistence, while millions of people who were born into great plenty hold enormous portions of the world’s wealth. But where is the outcry at this great injustice? Certainly, pity seems to be a poor substitute for outrage.

Similarly we worry, obsessively, that any system containing an element of “wealth distribution” would fail to encourage the innovation, creativity and determination that has produced our modern industrial society. But what were the motives of Edison, Bell or the Wright brothers? No doubt the amassing of vast wealth was very low on their lists - if it appeared at all. Instead, the evidence suggests that true genius is self-motivating and, to a great degree, self-rewarding.

If the goal is to create a society in which everyone willing and able to make a positive contribution is afforded a decent standard of living, including an excellent education and the kind of real heath care that is actually beneficial, there’s no question in my mind that we’re entirely capable of achieving that goal. But in order to do so we must put aside the unreasonable fear that the powerless might take advantage and replace it with the hope and belief that we can find a way to create a good and just world to leave to all its children, even if every human system is, in some respects, imperfect.

Why am I saying all this? I guess it’s because I continue to hope for real and meaningful change. So when I hear about things like corporate “bail-outs” in the billions, using money borrowed from our children, I have to wonder whether such schemes are actually the product of thoughtful reasoning, propelled by hope. Or are they only symptoms of fear and panic – as well as examples of the same sort of short-sighted thinking that created many of our troubles in the first place? And do these schemes and these great expenditures of money that we don’t have really help to put us on the road towards a good and just society - or do they only place us further down the road to ruin?

I really have to wonder.


user-pic

Hear, Hear, Maddie! Well said! Co-sign.

user-pic

It's astounding that the Treasury Dept. has no answers to the Congressional Oversight Panel on very fundamental questions: "What is your strategy? What do you see as the big problems? No answer on these and a half dozen or so other questions. Okay, so I get the "I'm kinda busy with spending 300 billion dollars" argument but really. Given the conflicts of interest, you would think Treasury would jump all over the transparency thing. Oh wait, we are still in the Bush Administration ....

See Global Investment Watch at http://globalinvestmentwatch.com/2009/01/10/congress-asks-trillion-dollar-questions-treasury-isnt-talking/

user-pic

why in the name of all that's holy does this kind of stuff rarely if ever appear in the washington, post?????

user-pic

This is so ridiculous, and sad, I'm snarkless.

user-pic

Paulson is a liar. It's evident in his body language and his voice. Paulson is nothing more than a lying criminal.

The Bush Admin was and is littered with criminals. This bailout is just a transfer of tax money directly into the pockets of the people who created the financial meltdown.

The press does nothing. The press yaks about what kind of puppy will soon be in the White House.

Who in their right mind would believe the people who gave us the war in Iraq, based on lies and deception, would take a trillion tax dollars and spend them properly with no criminal intent?

user-pic

Why isn'r Phil and Wendy Gramm's names out in front in every critical account of this bailout bullsh*t? The regulation destruction began with her at the Commodities Futures Trading Commission that gave Enron the ability to extort California and get on the Enron Board. Her old man inserted legislation that permited credit-default swaps. These two, in my opinion, opened the door for the financial crisis we are in now and are just as bad as Madoff. The same thing happened with oil futures that drove it to $150+/bl. ANYBODY who thinks business sectors, legal sectors, medical sectors or any other SECTOR can police (regulate) themselves is delusional.

user-pic

Good lord. The whole d*mn bailout is such a farce. Look at the Fed selling Bear-Sterns to JP Morgan-Chase at 3% interest; JP Morgan-Chase IS the Fed for chrissake! The whole damn thing is the illuminati utilizing failure of the financial markets and using circular logic to further enrich themselves and confuse and confound the rest of us. Some of "us" are informed however, and know this scam for what it is. If you don't fully understand what the bailout is doing/providing and don't know what the Federal Reserve is/exactly what it does(and most people don't)do a web search/read up on the Federal Reserve and educate yourselves. Warning: You will be PISSED

user-pic

We would all be better off if they gave these positions to some first-year business school grads, who are still flush with the simple truth of accounting, and not predisposed to bouts with derivative greed.

These Wall-Street book-cookers are a LOT like kids with a sealed cookie jar; they broke it to get at the goodies, now they're sifting through the mess to separate the cookies from the shards.

user-pic

WOW - Thanks to all who contibuted and especially for the historical backgrounds and insights. I agree with everyone except "OhioGuy" as well. (Maybe Ohio Guy is a plumber - I don't know...) Kudos to all, and maybe next week we'll see a positive changing of the guard, if it's not too late already.

user-pic

for overseeing TARP, I nominate Catherine Austin Fitts. She's got the background, the smarts, and an understanding of how the ugly games are played. She gives an excellent overview of the insider's economy here:
http://solari.com/blog/?p=818

excerpt:
The “slow burn” is a political culture and economy managed through principles of economic warfare in which insiders systematically protect themselves and centralize control and ownership of resources by using:

* Central banks
* Currency and lending systems
* Taxation
* Regulatory and enforcement policies
* Controlled media and entertainment

Insiders use these means to drain the time, resources, and life of people on the outside. Although insider cartels compete and jockey for power, they are able to settle their squabbles by increasing control and draining everyone and everything else. This is why the bubble economy continues to deplete the real economy. It is likely the reason why Dick Cheney said, “Deficits don’t matter.”

Catherine's work at Solari.com gives plenty of ideas for making a real and healthy economy.

user-pic


As Keith Olbermann has said several times:

"What today we call a Bailout, tomorrow we'll reffer to as 'Why Daddy Has to Go to Jail'".

-- ARG

user-pic

Our federal government has been totally corrupted by Reagan, Bush (SR), Clinton, and Bush (JR). The foxes have completely ravaged the henhouse, and all that remains are eggshell fragments.

The ultimate "dog-and-pony" show is nearing its final act, and the audience are the recipients of the feces. American taxpayers should rejoice that we have successfully saved our financial heritage by spending trillions of taxpayer dollars which have not yet been collected. We should pat each other on the back for a job well done, and once again congratulate our private sector oriented elected officials for doing what's best for the American people.

BRAVO

GJK

p.s. Please pass the KY - I feel like I've been screwed!

Leave a comment

Advertisement
Please disable your adblocker!
Ads are how we pay the bills!

Subscribe
Tip Line

Josh
Marshall

Bio

Zachary
Roth

Bio

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address