Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Summers Received Hundreds Of Thousands In Speaking Fees From TARP Recipients

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
antimatter98 Donating Member (537 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-03-09 10:27 PM
Original message
Summers Received Hundreds Of Thousands In Speaking Fees From TARP Recipients
Source: Huffington Post

Barack Obama's chief economic adviser, Larry Summers, received hundreds of thousands of dollars in speaking fees last year from firms that have direct financial interests before the government or are intimately involved in the White House's bank relief programs.

The White House released late Friday the personal financial disclosure forms of many high-ranking administration officials. The document provided for Summers, who serves as one of the president's closest confidants, underscores just how close some of these officials are to the industry over which they now have oversight.

Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/03/summers-received-hundreds_n_183058.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Kittycat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-03-09 10:32 PM
Response to Original message
1. Find me someone that knows what the hell is going on, that wasn't close.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UpInArms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-03-09 11:11 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. Paul Krugman - Eliot Spitzer
those are just two

Noriel Roubini
Joseph Stiglitz

for two more

Obama needs to get rid of the ones that have created the mess - they will never fix it - they can't see beyond their dirty greedy noses
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-04-09 05:11 AM
Response to Reply #1
21. Elizabeth Warren
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Larkspur Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-03-09 10:39 PM
Response to Original message
2. Summers and Geithner need to be fired
Summers relationship with the TARP recipients puts him in a conflict of interest situation and if Summers had any morals, he'd resign and go hide under a rock.

Geithner is not any better. See Bill Moyers interview with William Black in todays airing of the Bill Moyers Journal. Black slams Geithner for helping coverup the financial services scandal and for helping it along by not doing his job as a regulator when he was head of the NY Fed. Black makes Krugman's criticism of Geithner look tepid by comparison.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
balantz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-03-09 11:05 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. An excerpt from that show.
An excerpt from tonight's Bill Moyers show.



BILL MOYERS: Yeah. Are you saying that Timothy Geithner, the Secretary of the Treasury, and others in the administration, with the banks, are engaged in a cover up to keep us from knowing what went wrong?

WILLIAM K. BLACK: Absolutely.

BILL MOYERS: You are.

WILLIAM K. BLACK: Absolutely, because they are scared to death. All right? They're scared to death of a collapse. They're afraid that if they admit the truth, that many of the large banks are insolvent. They think Americans are a bunch of cowards, and that we'll run screaming to the exits. And we won't rely on deposit insurance. And, by the way, you can rely on deposit insurance. And it's foolishness. All right? Now, it may be worse than that. You can impute more cynical motives. But I think they are sincerely just panicked about, "We just can't let the big banks fail." That's wrong.

BILL MOYERS: But what might happen, at this point, if in fact they keep from us the true health of the banks?

WILLIAM K. BLACK: Well, then the banks will, as they did in Japan, either stay enormously weak, or Treasury will be forced to increasingly absurd giveaways of taxpayer money. We've seen how horrific AIG -- and remember, they kept secrets from everyone.

BILL MOYERS: A.I.G. did?

WILLIAM K. BLACK: What we're doing with -- no, Treasury and both administrations. The Bush administration and now the Obama administration kept secret from us what was being done with AIG. AIG was being used secretly to bail out favored banks like UBS and like Goldman Sachs. Secretary Paulson's firm, that he had come from being CEO. It got the largest amount of money. $12.9 billion. And they didn't want us to know that. And it was only Congressional pressure, and not Congressional pressure, by the way, on Geithner, but Congressional pressure on AIG.

Where Congress said, "We will not give you a single penny more unless we know who received the money." And, you know, when he was Treasury Secretary, Paulson created a recommendation group to tell Treasury what they ought to do with AIG. And he put Goldman Sachs on it.

BILL MOYERS: Even though Goldman Sachs had a big vested stake.

WILLIAM K. BLACK: Massive stake. And even though he had just been CEO of Goldman Sachs before becoming Treasury Secretary. Now, in most stages in American history, that would be a scandal of such proportions that he wouldn't be allowed in civilized society.

BILL MOYERS: Yeah, like a conflict of interest, it seems.

WILLIAM K. BLACK: Massive conflict of interests.

BILL MOYERS: So, how did he get away with it?

WILLIAM K. BLACK: I don't know whether we've lost our capability of outrage. Or whether the cover up has been so successful that people just don't have the facts to react to it.

BILL MOYERS: Who's going to get the facts?

WILLIAM K. BLACK: We need some chairmen or chairwomen--

BILL MOYERS: In Congress.

WILLIAM K. BLACK: --in Congress, to hold the necessary hearings. And we can blast this out. But if you leave the failed CEOs in place, it isn't just that they're terrible business people, though they are. It isn't just that they lack integrity, though they do. Because they were engaged in these frauds. But they're not going to disclose the truth about the assets.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vidar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-05-09 01:20 PM
Response to Reply #2
38. They definitely do, though I doubt it will happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oregone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-03-09 10:44 PM
Response to Original message
3. This just gets funnier
You know, in a black humor sense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gulfcoastliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-03-09 11:05 PM
Response to Original message
5. Nice to see the Friday news dumps are still S.O.P. with the administration... K&R
Yet another outrage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rollingrock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-04-09 12:32 AM
Response to Original message
7. Summers showered praise on the repeal of the Glass-Steagull Act
The elimination of the key regulatory provisions under Glass-Steagull in 1999 made every banker's wet dream come true. Clinton, Bush, Obama--what's the difference?




Summers hailed the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act in 1999, which lifted more than six decades of restrictions against banks offering commercial banking, insurance, and investment services (by repealing key provisions in the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act): "Today Congress voted to update the rules that have governed financial services since the Great Depression and replace them with a system for the 21st century," Summers said.<10> "This historic legislation will better enable American companies to compete in the new economy."<10> Many critics, including President Barack Obama, have suggested the 2007 subprime mortgage financial crisis was caused by the partial repeal of the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act.<11>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Summers




The Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 established the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) in the United States and included banking reforms, some of which were designed to control speculation.<1> Some provisions such as Regulation Q, which allowed the Federal Reserve to regulate interest rates in savings accounts, were repealed by the Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980. Provisions that prohibit a bank holding company from owning other financial companies were repealed on November 12, 1999, by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act.<2><3>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass-Steagall_Act
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-04-09 05:07 AM
Response to Reply #7
20. Rachel did a piece the other night about one of Geithner's new deputies...
...who oversaw the writing of the repeal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
november3rd Donating Member (653 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-04-09 01:15 AM
Response to Original message
8. The Baths of Caracalla
One day tourists will be coming to the ruins of the Capitol and marveling at the splendor wealthy, corrupt powerbrokers surrounded themselves with while running this country into the bottomless quicksand.

Congress could flex a little muscle and straignten this whole mess out with the financial services industry and the Obama administration. But you know what, the tourists in 2500 are going to read about how the Congress and the Senate were just as corrupt as the bought and paid for lobbyists and the Administration playing along with them all as if it were June 2001.

We need to get the Republicans out of the Democratic party and get some real progressives in there. Otherwise, the tourists in Washington will one day be mocking us over the way we allowed corruption to destroy our once-great Republic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-04-09 02:13 AM
Response to Original message
9. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
davidinalameda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-04-09 02:18 AM
Response to Original message
10. so you mean Summers spoke to banking groups?
who would have thought that banking groups would invite a former Treasury secretary to speak to them?

just amazing!



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Brucie Kibbutz Donating Member (704 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-04-09 02:33 AM
Response to Reply #10
11. I know what you mean this is really no big deal!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rollingrock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-04-09 04:00 AM
Response to Reply #11
14. It's no big deal to take millions of dollars
from the very companies that you're supposed to be forming governmental policy toward
and helping to form legislation on?? You call that no big deal? Simply amazing.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Brucie Kibbutz Donating Member (704 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-04-09 04:18 AM
Response to Reply #14
15. see post #9.
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rollingrock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-04-09 04:29 AM
Response to Reply #15
17. Bush supporters were braindead cheerleaders too
his supporters gave Bush unquestioning, undying support, even when it
became clear many members of his administration were highly corrupt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Brucie Kibbutz Donating Member (704 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-04-09 04:32 AM
Response to Reply #17
18. OK let's try this *one more time*. See post #16.
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rollingrock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-04-09 04:41 AM
Response to Reply #15
19. You forgot the sarcasm tag
btw, that's a funny pic of Obama.
he's giving away all our money to Wall Street.

not sure what the 2nd one is supposed to mean.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-04-09 06:53 AM
Response to Reply #15
23. Three words: CONFLICT OF INTEREST.
NT!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
biopowertoday Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-04-09 09:06 AM
Response to Reply #23
26. Yes, but seems to be OK for many who make excuses.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-04-09 11:28 AM
Response to Reply #11
34. O.M.G. that is the funniest Video Clip I Hav Ever Seen
that was absolutely perfect. Where did you get this clip from? I am still laughing my ass off.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davidinalameda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-04-09 11:41 PM
Response to Reply #11
36. I thought the sarcasm would be obvious
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grahamhgreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-04-09 03:01 AM
Response to Reply #10
12. Point is he should not even be allowed to work in finance due to his poor financial accumen, and
after taking bribes, er, fees.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rollingrock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-04-09 03:51 AM
Response to Reply #10
13. 'Invite' isn't the right word
more like they paid him to the tune of hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dollars.
I think a more accurate term for it would be a bribe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Brucie Kibbutz Donating Member (704 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-04-09 04:25 AM
Response to Reply #13
16. In light of current events,
I'd say the term "bribe" is appropriate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dansolo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-04-09 05:18 AM
Response to Reply #10
22. Then he should have stayed "former"
Nobody is objecting to him receiving speaking fees from the banks. The problem people have is that now that he is responsible for oversight, there is a huge conflict of interest. He is tainted, and should have declined the position.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Enrique Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-04-09 09:12 AM
Response to Reply #10
27. did you know that they don't really care about the speech?
when the banks paid Summers hundreds of thousands of dollars "speaking" it's really just a way to pay him the money. "Consulting fees" are sometimes the same way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davidinalameda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-04-09 11:42 PM
Response to Reply #27
37. you mean they don't hang on every word
wow-never knew that

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MannyGoldstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-04-09 08:14 AM
Response to Original message
24. No Shit? And So Did Emanuel etc. (Cue the DU Obama Sycophants...)
Edited on Sat Apr-04-09 08:14 AM by MannyGoldstein
Summers is a blight upon the Middle Class. With Clinton, he engineered economy-destroying wholesale financial deregulation and job-obliterating almost-free trade with China. Now he's engineered the latest "Hey bankers! Here's a few trillion, heads you win, tails we lose, ha-ha!!!" banker bailout. Coincidentally, he's collecting huge buckets of cash from bankers, as are virtually all of the other former Clinton appointees that are back to fuck us again in the Obama administration.

But whenever I point to these facts, I get a load of "But they're Democrats! You need to support the administration no matter what they do!"

Earth to sycophants: just because a person *calls themself* a Democrat doesn't mean that they *are* a Democrat. Certain basics apply, like not working to economically sodomize the Middle Class at every turn. Wolves in sheep's clothing are the most dangerous of all - there's a reason why we execute spies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tbyg52 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-04-09 08:56 AM
Response to Reply #24
25. >>just because a person *calls themself* a Democrat doesn't mean that they *are* a Democrat.
Bingo.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProgressIn2008 Donating Member (848 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-04-09 09:48 AM
Response to Reply #24
28. You're right. This is recycled shit and no number of apologists can make it go away. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Reterr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-04-09 11:18 AM
Response to Original message
29. Financial Industry Paid Millions to Obama Aide (Larry Summers)
Source: New York Times

Financial Industry Paid Millions to Obama Aide

WASHINGTON — Lawrence H. Summers, the top economic adviser to President Obama, earned more than $5 million last year from the hedge fund D. E. Shaw and collected $2.7 million in speaking fees from Wall Street companies that received government bailout money, the White House disclosed Friday in releasing financial information about top officials.

Mr. Summers, the director of the National Economic Council, wields important influence over Mr. Obama’s policy decisions for the troubled financial industry, including firms from which he recently received payments.

Last year, he reported making 40 paid appearances, including a $135,000 speech to the investment firm Goldman Sachs, in addition to his earnings from the hedge fund, a sector the administration is trying to regulate.


Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/04/us/politics/04disclose.html?_r=1&hp



I wish we could get rid of this guy. I didn't like him in the nineties when he was part of Clinton's administration and I don't like him now x(. He is such a tool.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mari333 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-04-09 11:18 AM
Response to Reply #29
30. My dream is that all of the pundits and politicians in DC
be forced to live on minimum wage for a year. with 4 kids. with no health insurance.
I would pay to see a reality show where they all lived in the same neighborhood and swapped recipes for ramen noodles.
fuckers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
acmavm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-04-09 11:18 AM
Response to Reply #30
32. Other than cooking shows and PBS, I'm not too thrilled with t.v. BUT I would
certainly watch if they put your show on. I could really become a fan of that type of 'reality' t.v.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
billyoc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-04-09 11:18 AM
Response to Reply #29
31. He should be in prison for influence peddling.
He took money from TARP recipients.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JFKfanforever Donating Member (145 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-05-09 02:47 PM
Response to Reply #31
39. Why is Summers part of the Obama administration?Read this!
GEITHNER’S DIRTY LITTLE SECRET 



By F. William Engdahl, 30 March 2009 

http://www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net/Financial_Tsunami/Geithner_Secret/geithner_secret.html


US Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner has unveiled his
long-awaited plan to put the US banking system back in order.
In doing so, he has refused to tell the ‘dirty little secret’
of the present financial crisis. By refusing to do so, he is
trying to save de facto bankrupt US banks that threaten to
bring the entire global system down in a new more devastating
phase of wealth destruction. 

The Geithner Plan, his so-called Public-Private Partnership
Investment Program or PPPIP, as we have noted previously 
(In German: Obamas Rettungsplan für die Banken: keine Lösung,
sondern legaler Diebstahl), is designed not to restore a
healthy lending system which would funnel credit to business
and consumers. Rather it is yet another intricate scheme to
pour even more hundreds of billions directly to the leading
banks and Wall Street firms responsible for the current mess
in world credit markets without demanding they change their
business model. Yet, one might say, won’t this eventually
help the problem by getting the banks back to health? 

Not the way the Obama Administration is proceeding. In
defending his plan on US TV recently, Geithner, a protégé of
Henry Kissinger who previously was President of the New York
Federal Reserve Bank, argued that his intent was ‘not to
sustain weak banks at the expense of strong.’ Yet this is
precisely what the PPPIP does. The weak banks are the five
largest banks in the system. 

The ‘dirty little secret’ which Geithner is going to great
degrees to obscure from the public is very simple. There are
only at most perhaps five US banks which are the source of
the toxic poison that is causing such dislocation in the
world financial system. What Geithner is desperately trying
to protect is that reality. The heart of the present problem
and the reason ordinary loan losses as in prior bank crises
are not the problem, is a variety of exotic financial
derivatives, most especially so-called Credit Default Swaps. 

In 2000 the Clinton Administration then-Treasury Secretary
was a man named Larry Summers. Summers had just been promoted
from No. 2 under Wall Street Goldman Sachs banker Robert Rubin
to be No. 1 when Rubin left Washington to take up the post of
Vice Chairman of Citigroup. As I describe in detail in my new
book, Power of Money: The Rise and Fall of the American
Century, to be released this summer, Summers convinced
President Bill Clinton to sign several Republican bills into
law which opened the floodgates for banks to abuse their
powers. The fact that the Wall Street big banks spent some $5
billion in lobbying for these changes after 1998 was likely
not lost on Clinton. 

One significant law was the repeal of the 1933 Depression-era
Glass-Steagall Act that prohibited mergers of commercial
banks, insurance companies and brokerage firms like Merrill
Lynch or Goldman Sachs. A second law backed by Treasury
Secretary Summers in 2000 was an obscure but deadly important
Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000. That law
prevented the responsible US Government regulatory agency,
Commodity Futures Trading Corporation (CFTC), from having any
oversight over the trading of financial derivatives. The new
CFMA law stipulated that so-called Over-the-Counter (OTC)
derivatives like Credit Default Swaps, such as those involved
in the AIG insurance disaster, (which investor Warren Buffett
once called ‘weapons of mass financial destruction’), be free
from Government regulation. 

At the time Summers was busy opening the floodgates of
financial abuse for the Wall Street Money Trust, his
assistant was none other than Tim Geithner, the man who today
is US Treasury Secretary. Today, Geithner’s old boss, Larry
Summers, is President Obama’s chief economic adviser, as head
of the White House Economic Council. To have Geithner and
Summers responsible for cleaning up the financial mess is
tantamount to putting the proverbial fox in to guard the
henhouse. 

The ‘Dirty Little Secret’ 

What Geithner does not want the public to understand, his
‘dirty little secret’ is that the repeal of Glass-Steagall
and the passage of the Commodity Futures Modernization Act in
2000 allowed the creation of a tiny handful of banks that
would virtually monopolize key parts of the global
‘off-balance sheet’ or Over-The-Counter derivatives issuance.


Today five US banks according to data in the just-released
Federal Office of Comptroller of the Currency’s Quarterly
Report on Bank Trading and Derivatives Activity, hold 96% of
all US bank derivatives positions in terms of nominal values,
and an eye-popping 81% of the total net credit risk exposure
in event of default. 

The five are, in declining order of importance: JPMorgan
Chase which holds a staggering $88 trillion in derivatives
(€66 trillion!). Morgan Chase is followed by Bank of America
with $38 trillion in derivatives, and Citibank with $32
trillion. Number four in the derivatives sweepstakes is
Goldman Sachs with a ‘mere’ $30 trillion in derivatives.
Number five, the merged Wells Fargo -Wachovia Bank, drops
dramatically in size to $5 trillion. Number six, Britain’s
HSBC Bank USA has $3.7 trillion. 

After that the size of US bank exposure to these explosive
off-balance-sheet unregulated derivative obligations falls
off dramatically. Just to underscore the magnitude, trillion
is written 1,000,000,000,000. Continuing to pour taxpayer
money into these five banks without changing their operating
system, is tantamount to treating an alcoholic with unlimited
free booze. 

The Government bailouts of AIG to over $180 billion to date
has primarily gone to pay off AIG’s Credit Default Swap
obligations to counterparty gamblers Goldman Sachs, Citibank,
JP Morgan Chase, Bank of America, the banks who believe they
are ‘too big to fail.’ In effect, these five institutions
today believe they are so large that they can dictate the
policy of the Federal Government. Some have called it a
bankers’ coup d’etat. It definitely is not healthy. 

This is Geithner’s and Wall Street’s Dirty Little Secret that
they desperately try to hide because it would focus voter
attention on real solutions. The Federal Government has long
had laws in place to deal with insolvent banks. The FDIC
places the bank into receivership, its assets and liabilities
are sorted out by independent audit. The irresponsible
management is purged, stockholders lose and the purged bank
is eventually split into smaller units and when healthy, sold
to the public. The power of the five mega banks to blackmail
the entire nation would thereby be cut down to size. Ooohh.
Uh Huh? 

This is what Wall Street and Geithner are frantically trying
to prevent. The problem is concentrated in these five large
banks. The financial cancer must be isolated and contained by
Federal agency in order for the host, the real economy, to
return to healthy function. 

This is what must be put into bankruptcy receivership, or
nationalization. Every hour the Obama Administration delays
that, and refuses to demand full independent government audit
of the true solvency or insolvency of these five or so banks,
inevitably costs to the US and to the world economy will
snowball as derivatives losses explode. That is
pre-programmed as worsening economic recession mean corporate
bankruptcies are rising, home mortgage defaults are exploding,
unemployment is shooting up. This is a situation that is
deliberately being allowed to run out of (responsible
Government) control by Treasury Secretary Geithner, Summers
and ultimately the President, whether or not he has taken the
time to grasp what is at stake. 

Once the five problem banks have been put into isolation by
the FDIC and the Treasury, the Administration must introduce
legislation to immediately repeal the Larry Summers bank
deregulation including restore Glass-Steagall and repeal the
Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 that allowed the
present criminal abuse of the banking trust. Then serious
financial reform can begin to be discussed, starting with
steps to ‘federalize’ the Federal Reserve and take the power
of money out of the hands of private bankers such as JP
Morgan Chase, Citibank or Goldman Sachs. 

 
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
acmavm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-04-09 11:18 AM
Response to Reply #29
33. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MimiAvril Donating Member (4 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-04-09 05:02 PM
Response to Original message
35. Greenwald is calling it an "advance bribe"
Goldman would not be able to make a one-day $135,000 payment to Summers now that he is Obama's top economics adviser, but doing so a few months beforehand was obviously something about which neither parties felt any compunction. It's basically an advanced bribe. And it's paying off in spades.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/04/04/summers/index.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bemildred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-05-09 05:51 PM
Response to Original message
40. Sort of a retainer. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 24th 2024, 08:43 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC