Member since: Fri Sep 17, 2004, 03:59 PM
Number of posts: 44,414
Number of posts: 44,414
- 2014 (2586)
- 2013 (3310)
- 2012 (5564)
- 2011 (122)
- December (122)
- Older Archives
Federal Reserve Admits To Keeping Bankers Out Of Jail
by Richard Lyon
Ever since the financial crash of 2008 there has been a running controversy about the criminal responsibility of the executives of the major banks who had carefully constructed the house of cards that suddenly collapsed creating a chain reaction that created a global recession. When one looked at their elaborate schemes to create and peddle exotic securities that rested on junk debt, it was pretty difficult to swallow the line that nobody could have known that this would happen.
The Fed Just Acknowledged Its Too Big To Jail Policy
The federal government until recently shielded big banks from criminal prosecution out of concern that convictions may damage the financial system, a top Federal Reserve official said Friday, explicitly acknowledging a policy long denied by the Obama administration.
The admission came during a tense exchange between William Dudley, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, and Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) at a Senate Banking Committee hearing meant to explore the cozy relations between federal regulators and the banks they supervise.
Until May, large financial institutions investigated for wrongdoing had dodged criminal prosecution under the Obama administration, despite evidence from federal regulators and prosecutors showing that big banks had, for instance, laundered money for suspected terrorists and drug cartels; manipulated interest rate benchmarks; rigged various commodities markets; mislead investors in mortgage-linked securities; duped homeowners into taking out expensive mortgages; manipulated municipal debt markets; and broke state and federal rules when attempting to seize homes after borrowers fell behind on their payments, a scandal that became known as "robosigning."
Both Republican and Democratic lawmakers have long suspected that federal prosecutors didn’t pursue guilty pleas because they were afraid the consequences -- a potential unraveling of a giant bank -- would endanger the global economy. Attorney General Eric Holder suggested that was the case in March 2013, but quickly walked back his comments after a public outcry.
Posted by kpete | Sat Nov 22, 2014, 09:04 PM (2 replies)
Indianapolis newspaper alters, then deletes racist Thanksgiving cartoon following complaints
Gary Varvel cartoon original (Indy Star)
Gary Varvel edited cartoon (Indy Star)
LOL: answer here:
Posted by kpete | Sat Nov 22, 2014, 07:10 PM (15 replies)
It's not news. It's Fox News:
First, take a look at how the Associated Press covered the House report on Benghazi released Friday. The AP's headline is "House intel panel debunks many Benghazi theories." What follows are the first three paragraphs of their article:
WASHINGTON (AP) — A two-year investigation by the Republican-controlled House Intelligence Committee has found that the CIA and the military acted properly in responding to the 2012 attack on a U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, and asserted no wrongdoing by Obama administration appointees.
Debunking a series of persistent allegations hinting at dark conspiracies, the investigation of the politically charged incident determined that there was no intelligence failure, no delay in sending a CIA rescue team, no missed opportunity for a military rescue, and no evidence the CIA was covertly shipping arms from Libya to Syria.
In the immediate aftermath of the attack, intelligence about who carried it out and why was contradictory, the report found. That led Susan Rice, then U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, to inaccurately assert that the attack had evolved from a protest, when in fact there had been no protest. But it was intelligence analysts, not political appointees, who made the wrong call, the committee found. The report did not conclude that Rice or any other government official acted in bad faith or intentionally misled the American people.
How, exactly, did Fox News cover the House Benghazi report? Fox's headline is "CIA gathered intelligence on weapons to Syria: Benghazi report." What the hell does that even mean? That's not burying the lede. That's changing the lede into a word salad. Here are the first three paragraphs from the Fox News article online:
A leading Republican wants to expand the House investigation into the 2012 Benghazi terrorist attack by adding a Senate probe, as a new House Intelligence Committee report Friday concluded that the initial CIA assessment found no demonstrations prior to the assault and a primary purpose of the CIA operation in eastern Libya was to track the movement of weapons to Syria.
The report described the attack as "complex" with the attackers affiliated with Al Qaeda. It also said the initial CIA assessment concluded there were no demonstrations outside the State Department Consulate in Eastern Libya.
Referring to the House Select committee Chairman, and the Democratic ranking member, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-SC, said the current House investigation should be expanded.
You can read the whole Fox story for yourselves. Nowhere in it does it say anything about the report's main findings regarding a lack of wrongdoing by the Administration or the State Department, as reported not only by the AP but by NPR, ("House Panel Finds 'No Intelligence Failure' Before Benghazi Attack"), CNN ("Republican-led report debunks Benghazi theories and accusations"), the Wall Street Journal ("House Report Finds No Attempt to Mislead Public Over Benghazi"), and every other article on the report I could find. Oh, and Fox News' TV coverage of the report also ignored the report, unsurprisingly.
more, plus links:
Posted by kpete | Sat Nov 22, 2014, 12:57 PM (10 replies)
Immediately after the election, when John Boehner asked Obama to hold off on unilateral action, reporters asked if he would promise to bring an immigration bill to the House floor. He refused. A senior administration official pinpointed this as the moment when any chance of delay ended. For all the drama surrounding President Obama’s announcement that he would ease immigration enforcement, the decision was always a very easy one to make. It was not even a decision Obama made so much as one that was made for him. Nor was the choice especially difficult to grapple with. The humanitarian and political logic all point in the same direction.
This rather mild form of vengeance, though, is probably not what furious tea partiers have in mind. And here is where Obama’s announcement will leave its deepest imprint. The emotional momentum in the Republican Party now falls to its most furious, deranged voices. Michele Bachmann has denounced what she calls “millions of unskilled, illiterate, foreign nationals coming into the United States who can’t speak the English language.” Rep. Mo Brooks of Alabama has even presented the most sympathetic slice of the immigrant community — the ones serving in the military — as a source of insidious competition and even treason. (“I don’t want American citizens having to compete with illegal immigrants for jobs in our military … These individuals have to be absolutely 100 percent loyal and trustworthy.” Steve King, a regular font of nativist outbursts, is setting himself up as a power broker in Iowa, which will command center stage in the GOP primary for months and months on end.
This is the point of contrast that Obama drew out clearly and effectively. After years of legislative muddle, he was able to detach himself completely from Congress and articulate his own values. His remarks, met with rapt attention in immigrant communities, continued his rhetorical tradition of expanding the American family, accurately presenting himself (and, by extension, his party) as an ally to marginalized Americans. Speaking with evident passion, the president deemed the children of undocumented immigrants “as American as Malia or Sasha.” He cited scripture: “We shall not oppress a stranger, for we know the heart of a stranger — we were strangers once, too.” He drew an emotional bond between immigrant communities and the Democratic Party’s ideal of compassion and tolerance. That bond will be his announcement’s most enduring legacy.
Posted by kpete | Sat Nov 22, 2014, 12:28 PM (2 replies)
Black Tyrant: 193
Posted by kpete | Sat Nov 22, 2014, 12:04 PM (0 replies)
You might be a Republican if you're frantically tweeting your disapproval of immigration reform while undocumented people mow your lawn.
Posted by kpete | Sat Nov 22, 2014, 10:53 AM (1 replies)
Posted by kpete | Sat Nov 22, 2014, 10:46 AM (2 replies)
Posted by kpete | Sat Nov 22, 2014, 10:37 AM (2 replies)
I am but a lowly blogger, bereft of my parents' basement since they traded suburban bliss for the retirement home. My jammies are torn and frayed and I'm running dangerously low on Cheetos. Who am I, then, to take on the laborious task of countering the six trillion hours of media coverage that aired on the "Benghazi Scandal" with an equal and countervailing amount of coverage on the now established fact that it was ALL bullshit from the start? This is clearly not my job.
It won't be anyone's job, of course. But it should be. Any media outlet that lent credence to this "debate" ought to spend the next three-plus years publishing articles and airing pieces on the extent to which this was all a cynical and spiteful lie from the beginning. They should keep doing these pieces no matter how much it outrages and annoys their audiences. They should do it long after it has any potential to edify the public. They should beat it like a dead horse until people do parodies of the media for beating dead horses, and then should keep doing it for several years after that.
Every day should be Susan Rice Vindication Day. We should wake every morning to mockery of Darrell Issa and go to sleep each night to ridicule of Mitt Romney. This should go on until all decent people have long ago given up and stopped begging for it to stop.
And, sometime in late 2017, we will have reached Fair & Balanced coverage of the tragedy in Benghazi.
Posted by kpete | Sat Nov 22, 2014, 09:56 AM (0 replies)
John Boehner Gets Slammed On His Own His Facebook Page
by Leslie Salzillo
Republican House Speaker John Boehner delivered a pathetic 25-second video quip on his Facebook page, in response to President Obama's Thursday night's immigration speech. In his awkward video, Boehner downright embarrasses himself. I kept waiting to hear hiccups, between each slightly slurred sentence. (Was it me?) To view Boehner's video/page, visit here. Bad timing. Bad governing. Bad speaker.
The text from Boehner's video is short, manipulative, and stupid:
"Instead of working together to fix our broken immigration system, the president says he’s acting on his own. But that is just not how our democracy works. The president has said before that ‘he’s not king’ and he’s ‘not an emperor,’ but he sure is acting like one. And he's doing it at a time when the American people want nothing more than for us to work together. "
While typing that, my fingers tried to bolt from the keys. I had to call them back. They didn't want to come. This man is a conniving pompous ass who continues to guzzle up our time, energy, and tax dollars. But let me step aside, and let other Americans tell Boehner how they feel:
Posted by kpete | Sat Nov 22, 2014, 09:38 AM (13 replies)