This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
"I Am Putting Everything In Goldman Sachs Because These Guys Can Do Whatever The Hell They Want"
When we first covered the Carmen Segarra lawsuit alleging the capture of the NY Fed by Goldman Sachs back in October 2013,
we didn't have much hope for justice to get done. We said that "while
her allegations may be non-definitive, and her wrongful termination suit
is ultimately dropped, there is hope this opens up an inquiry into the
close relationship between Goldman and the NY Fed. Alas, since the
judicial branch is also under the control of the two abovementioned
entities, we very much doubt it."
Sure enough, the lawsuit was dropped (and no inquiry was opened) but not before it became clear that the very judge in charge of the case, U.S. District Judge Ronnie Abrams, was herself conflicted, after it was revealed that her husband, Greg Andres, a partner at Davis Polk & Wardwell, was representing Goldman in an advisory capacity. Curiously, before she assumed her current office in March 2013, back in 2008 Abrams returned to Davis Polk herself as Special Counsel for Pro Bono. She had previously worked at the firm from 1994 to 1998. For the full, and quite amazing, story of how the "Judge" steamrolled Segarra's objections reads this Reuters piece.
As a result of this fiasco, some wondered just how far do Goldman's tentacles stretch not only at the money-printing (i.e., NY Fed) level, not only at the legislative level (see "With Cantor Down, Which Other Politicians Has Goldman Invested In?"), but at the judicial as well.
And then, on Friday, the Segarra case against the Federal Reserve branch of Goldman Sachs got a second wind, when as a result of another disclosure, ProPublica revealed "How Goldman Controls The New York Fed in 47.5 Hours Of "The Secret Goldman Sachs Tapes." That is to say, nothing new was revealed per se, because as anyone who has read this website for the past 6 years knows just how vast Goldman's network is not only at the Fed, but in that all important other continent too, Europe.
Sadly, just like a year ago, so this time too, we are reluctant to say anything will change. In fact, there is too much at stake, for Goldman to drop the reins and disassociate from the NY Fed: for pete's sake, the president of the NY Fed is a former Goldman employee - does it get any more conflicted than that?!
But, wait, Goldman will do penance by "prohibiting its bankers from buying stocks"... the horror. Luckily at least purchasing politicians and Fed presidents is still perfectly allowed.
In fact, what has become clear to everyone is that aside from yet another dog and pony show (led by, you guessed, it the head dog and ponier herself, Elizabeth Warren), not only will nothing change, but in fact the best way to take advantage of a broken, corrupt, sinking system, is to join it. And the best summary of just that sentiment was released over the weekend by Nanex' Eric Hunsader as follows:
Curious what made up Eric's mind? Then fast forward to minute 24 to hear what it sounds like when a top Fed official "questions" Goldman Sachs:
But before we put this topic to bed, here is Raúl Ilargi Meijer explaining why "The US Has No Banking Regulation, And It Doesn’t Want Any"
* * *
It is, let’s say, exceedingly peculiar to begin with that a government – in this case the American one, but that’s just one example - in name of its people tasks a private institution with regulating not just any sector of its economy, but the richest and most politically powerful sector in the nation. Which also happens to be at least one of the major forces behind its latest, and ongoing, economical crisis.
That there is a very transparent, plain for everyone to see, over-sized revolving door between the regulator and the corporations in the sector only makes the government’s choice for the Fed as regulator even more peculiar. Or, as it turns out, more logical. But it is still preposterous: regulating the financial sector is a mere illusion kept alive through lip service. Put differently: the American government doesn’t regulate the banks. They effectively regulate themselves. Which inevitably means there is no regulation.
The newly found attention for ProPublica writer Jake Bernstein’s series of articles, which date back almost one whole year, about the experiences of former Fed regulator Carmen Segarra, and the audio files she collected while trying to do her job, leaves no question about this.
What’s going on is abundantly clear, because it is so simple. The intention of the New York Fed as an organization is not to properly regulate, but only to generate an appearance – or illusion – of proper regulation. That is to say, Goldman will accept regulation only up to the point where it would cut into either the company’s profits or its political wherewithal.
What the ‘Segarra Files’ point out is that the New York Fed plays the game exactly the way Goldman wants it played. Ergo: there is no actual regulation taking place, and Goldman will comply only with those requests from the New York Fed that it feels like complying with.
In the articles, the term ‘regulatory capture’ pops up, which means – individual – regulators are ‘co-opted’ by the banks they – are supposed to – regulate. But the capture runs much larger and wider. It’s not about individuals, it’s a watertight and foolproof system wide capture.
The government picks a – private – regulator which has close ties to the banks. The government knows this. It also knows this means that its chosen regulator will always defer to the banks. And when individual regulators refuse to comply with the system, they are thrown out.
In one of the cases Segarra was involved in during her stint at the Fed, the Kinder Morgan-El Paso takeover deal, Goldman advises one party, has substantial stock holdings in the other, and appoints a lead counsel who personally has $340,000 in stock involved. Conflict of interest? Goldman says no, and the Fed complies (defers).
The lawsuit Segarra filed against the NY Fed and three of its executives was thrown out on technicalities by a judge whose husband was legal counsel for Goldman in the exact same case. No conflict of interest, the judge herself decides.
This is not regulation, it’s a sick and perverted joke played on the American people, which it has been paying for it through the nose for years, and will for many years to come. Sure, Elizabeth Warren picks it up now and wants hearings on the topic in Congress, but she’s a year late (it’s been known since at least December 2013 that Segarra has audio recordings) and moreover, it was Congress itself that made the NY Fed the regulator of Wall Street. Warren has as much chance of getting anywhere as Segarra did (or does, she’s appealing the case).
The story: In October 2011, Carmen Segarra was hired by New York Fed to be embedded at Goldman as a risk specialist, and in particular to investigate to what degree the company complied with a 2008 Fed Supervision and Regulation Letter, known as SR 08-08, which focuses on the requirement for firms like Goldman, engaged in many different activities, to have company-wide programs to manage business risks, in particular conflict-of-interest. Some people at Goldman admitted it did not have such a company-wide policy as of November 2011. Others, though, said it did.
Let’s take it from there with quotes from the 5 articles Bernstein wrote on the topic over the past year. To listen to the Segarra files, please go to The Secret Recordings of Carmen Segarra at This American Life.
One last thing: Jake Bernstein’s work is of high quality, but I can’t really figure why he says things such as the audio files show: “a New York Fed that is at times reluctant to push hard against Goldman and struggling to define its authority”. Through his work, and the files, it should be clear that just ain’t so. Both the Fed’s policy and authority are crystal clear and ironclad.
Sure enough, the lawsuit was dropped (and no inquiry was opened) but not before it became clear that the very judge in charge of the case, U.S. District Judge Ronnie Abrams, was herself conflicted, after it was revealed that her husband, Greg Andres, a partner at Davis Polk & Wardwell, was representing Goldman in an advisory capacity. Curiously, before she assumed her current office in March 2013, back in 2008 Abrams returned to Davis Polk herself as Special Counsel for Pro Bono. She had previously worked at the firm from 1994 to 1998. For the full, and quite amazing, story of how the "Judge" steamrolled Segarra's objections reads this Reuters piece.
As a result of this fiasco, some wondered just how far do Goldman's tentacles stretch not only at the money-printing (i.e., NY Fed) level, not only at the legislative level (see "With Cantor Down, Which Other Politicians Has Goldman Invested In?"), but at the judicial as well.
And then, on Friday, the Segarra case against the Federal Reserve branch of Goldman Sachs got a second wind, when as a result of another disclosure, ProPublica revealed "How Goldman Controls The New York Fed in 47.5 Hours Of "The Secret Goldman Sachs Tapes." That is to say, nothing new was revealed per se, because as anyone who has read this website for the past 6 years knows just how vast Goldman's network is not only at the Fed, but in that all important other continent too, Europe.
Sadly, just like a year ago, so this time too, we are reluctant to say anything will change. In fact, there is too much at stake, for Goldman to drop the reins and disassociate from the NY Fed: for pete's sake, the president of the NY Fed is a former Goldman employee - does it get any more conflicted than that?!
But, wait, Goldman will do penance by "prohibiting its bankers from buying stocks"... the horror. Luckily at least purchasing politicians and Fed presidents is still perfectly allowed.
In fact, what has become clear to everyone is that aside from yet another dog and pony show (led by, you guessed, it the head dog and ponier herself, Elizabeth Warren), not only will nothing change, but in fact the best way to take advantage of a broken, corrupt, sinking system, is to join it. And the best summary of just that sentiment was released over the weekend by Nanex' Eric Hunsader as follows:
Curious what made up Eric's mind? Then fast forward to minute 24 to hear what it sounds like when a top Fed official "questions" Goldman Sachs:
But before we put this topic to bed, here is Raúl Ilargi Meijer explaining why "The US Has No Banking Regulation, And It Doesn’t Want Any"
* * *
It is, let’s say, exceedingly peculiar to begin with that a government – in this case the American one, but that’s just one example - in name of its people tasks a private institution with regulating not just any sector of its economy, but the richest and most politically powerful sector in the nation. Which also happens to be at least one of the major forces behind its latest, and ongoing, economical crisis.
That there is a very transparent, plain for everyone to see, over-sized revolving door between the regulator and the corporations in the sector only makes the government’s choice for the Fed as regulator even more peculiar. Or, as it turns out, more logical. But it is still preposterous: regulating the financial sector is a mere illusion kept alive through lip service. Put differently: the American government doesn’t regulate the banks. They effectively regulate themselves. Which inevitably means there is no regulation.
The newly found attention for ProPublica writer Jake Bernstein’s series of articles, which date back almost one whole year, about the experiences of former Fed regulator Carmen Segarra, and the audio files she collected while trying to do her job, leaves no question about this.
What’s going on is abundantly clear, because it is so simple. The intention of the New York Fed as an organization is not to properly regulate, but only to generate an appearance – or illusion – of proper regulation. That is to say, Goldman will accept regulation only up to the point where it would cut into either the company’s profits or its political wherewithal.
What the ‘Segarra Files’ point out is that the New York Fed plays the game exactly the way Goldman wants it played. Ergo: there is no actual regulation taking place, and Goldman will comply only with those requests from the New York Fed that it feels like complying with.
In the articles, the term ‘regulatory capture’ pops up, which means – individual – regulators are ‘co-opted’ by the banks they – are supposed to – regulate. But the capture runs much larger and wider. It’s not about individuals, it’s a watertight and foolproof system wide capture.
The government picks a – private – regulator which has close ties to the banks. The government knows this. It also knows this means that its chosen regulator will always defer to the banks. And when individual regulators refuse to comply with the system, they are thrown out.
In one of the cases Segarra was involved in during her stint at the Fed, the Kinder Morgan-El Paso takeover deal, Goldman advises one party, has substantial stock holdings in the other, and appoints a lead counsel who personally has $340,000 in stock involved. Conflict of interest? Goldman says no, and the Fed complies (defers).
The lawsuit Segarra filed against the NY Fed and three of its executives was thrown out on technicalities by a judge whose husband was legal counsel for Goldman in the exact same case. No conflict of interest, the judge herself decides.
This is not regulation, it’s a sick and perverted joke played on the American people, which it has been paying for it through the nose for years, and will for many years to come. Sure, Elizabeth Warren picks it up now and wants hearings on the topic in Congress, but she’s a year late (it’s been known since at least December 2013 that Segarra has audio recordings) and moreover, it was Congress itself that made the NY Fed the regulator of Wall Street. Warren has as much chance of getting anywhere as Segarra did (or does, she’s appealing the case).
The story: In October 2011, Carmen Segarra was hired by New York Fed to be embedded at Goldman as a risk specialist, and in particular to investigate to what degree the company complied with a 2008 Fed Supervision and Regulation Letter, known as SR 08-08, which focuses on the requirement for firms like Goldman, engaged in many different activities, to have company-wide programs to manage business risks, in particular conflict-of-interest. Some people at Goldman admitted it did not have such a company-wide policy as of November 2011. Others, though, said it did.
Let’s take it from there with quotes from the 5 articles Bernstein wrote on the topic over the past year. To listen to the Segarra files, please go to The Secret Recordings of Carmen Segarra at This American Life.
One last thing: Jake Bernstein’s work is of high quality, but I can’t really figure why he says things such as the audio files show: “a New York Fed that is at times reluctant to push hard against Goldman and struggling to define its authority”. Through his work, and the files, it should be clear that just ain’t so. Both the Fed’s policy and authority are crystal clear and ironclad.
»
- 56492 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
From Around The Web
Forget Googling Their Name. New Site Can Reveal ... Been Verified
One Way You Didn't Know You Could Pay Off Credit ... WeeklyFinancialSolutions
Must Have Appliances Being sold For Next To Nothing Life Factopia
See Why Paying More Than 0% Interest On Your ... Next Advisor
George Brown Beat Google. And He's Now A Millionaire. The Money Expert
Here's What America's Next Market Crash Could Look ... Money Morning
Sponsored Content by nRelate
Contact Information:
Tips: tips [ at ] zerohedge.com
General: info [ at ] zerohedge.com
Legal: legal [ at ] zerohedge.com
Advertising: ads [ at ] zerohedge.com
Abuse/Complaints: abuse [ at ] zerohedge.com
Suggested Reading:
Make sure to read our "How To [Read/Tip Off] Zero Hedge Without Attracting The Interest Of [Human Resources/The Treasury/Black Helicopters]" Guide
It would be very wise of you to study our disclaimer, our privacy policy and our (non)policy on conflicts / full disclosure. Here's our Cookie Policy.
Notice on Racial Discrimination.
Tips: tips [ at ] zerohedge.com
General: info [ at ] zerohedge.com
Legal: legal [ at ] zerohedge.com
Advertising: ads [ at ] zerohedge.com
Abuse/Complaints: abuse [ at ] zerohedge.com
Suggested Reading:
Make sure to read our "How To [Read/Tip Off] Zero Hedge Without Attracting The Interest Of [Human Resources/The Treasury/Black Helicopters]" Guide
It would be very wise of you to study our disclaimer, our privacy policy and our (non)policy on conflicts / full disclosure. Here's our Cookie Policy.
Notice on Racial Discrimination.
Do you think Goldman has any secret financial blogs on interwebs?
goldmann sachs does rule the world...
"Jon Corzine also did whatever the hell he wanted too. Including stealing all his customer's money."
and that's why the smart money was with mfg
and with gs
hugs,
bernie
now the real question in relation to today's timeline, when was 1932 and when is 1944?
http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/536/the-secret-re...
We're screwed.
When the guillotines start rolling (as they do when every empire collapses), Blankfein, Dimon, Corzine and corporate fascist cunts like them will be at the top of the list for a neck shave. Their transgressions are too well documented for it to be otherwise.
Hopefully in our lifetimes, and definately worth getting pay per view if you can't make the pilgrimage to spectate.
Political Ponerology
+1000
You get to hear some of the players at the Fed who do the Squid's bidding. Two that are on the recording are Michael Silva and Jonathon Kim:
http://aux.edinboro.edu/pea/conf/2013Scranton/program2013.htm
Jonathon Kim's Linkedin link no longer works
Now he is working on stealing everyone's 401k. Success begets success.
With CNBC's ratings, does it make money? If so, for how long? In any case, its owners are unlikely to care whether it makes money or not.
Profit is profit.
Audacity, Courage and Imagination trump Fear, Hate and Preconceptions.
If they can infiltrate us, we can do the same. They are paranoid as it is, so this would really wind them up. ;-)
It was the KLINGONS he didn't like. They killed his son...
Have you seen that recipe for Revolution Surprise? I know it's here somewhere...
GS, MON, LMT, JPM, BRK
More suggestions, please?
hopey/changy
But that's not the real story. If one just thinks about it. Goldman is the FED and the CB of the World. Follow the Money.
Hank Paulson, CEO of Goldman and Neel Kashkari also from Goldman bailed out Goldman and others under Bush.
And somehow, Goldman became a bank so they too could go to the discount window. They wanted more than Buffit gave them.
Greed is Good. Bush worshipped Hank and Neel who enginnered the bailout to saved the Financial system. Too big to fail lives on.
Yet nobody went to jail. Nobody. I have lost faith in our financial system, our government and our political system.
Fuck these motherfuckers. At least throw one in jail. At least try to put on a show for us. They don't even hide it anymore. Just a hidy-ho, f ff fuck you, little people, peon tax slave debt serfs. Civilians, that's what we are.
And to add insult to injury, if you stop off at the watering hole, and try to forget about this shit, a roid ranger pops you, and that costs 10 grand. But an illegal , no Licencse ,no insurance..... They let him go on his way.
I can't wait until the wheels come off this bus, and the guns and ropes come out. Yeah, we will all suffer, but it will be worth it.
The law. A fucking joke. Only "little" people and civilians have to follow the law.
there is zero difference between Madoff's investment scheme and goldman's or the fed's schemes- they are ponzi scams no matter how you look at em.
Madoff was nothing more than a bone thrown to the keep the lynch mob at bay for a while longer.
That reminds me, if greed is good, then so is gluttony.
Your boss is calling:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=93pfNmQ85PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_fibre
Wait... it gets "better": The Bright Web financed the Dark Web. Call it "Dark Leveraging", courtesy of the Plebeian Masses.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/09/28/india-modi-appearanc...
the country's large number of educated professionals means "we will provide a workforce to the entire world," Modi said. "You cannot go anyplace in the world and not see an Indian."
"He loves India. He want to present the philosophy of India — live and let others live, peace and tranquility.
Janus has "SPOKEN".
The more things Change...
It explains a lot.
I'll keep posting this link until my arm falls off:
http://unicornpoo.wordpress.com/2011/10/27/very-pleased-we-have-entered-...
s/
Many thanks for the kind words. Spread this info around if you're so moved.
Keep it up, Why? Someone has to and you have the readers. Thanks.
Dey pwomised! ;-)
I still find it absolutely incomprehensible nothing was done when his pedestrian room-mate's menu of sexual delicacies being offered for sale to fellow perverts were listed a "Fannie or Freddie" delicacies.
Why, they must be immune ;-)
The Gall of these people.
played on the American people"
& reminds me of 2 quotes of Lily Tomlin:
"No matter how cynical you become,
it's never enough to keep up." AND,
"The best mind-altering drug is truth."
It is no longer possible to keep up, no matter now cynically sarcastic, or sarcastically cynical, one attempts to be. In my view there is nothing left which is sufficient to cope than to go THROUGH the Looking Glass of the Bizarro Mirror World.
After we get to the degree of recognizing the FACTS that the government is the biggest form of organized crime, controlled by the best organized gang of criminals, while that situation is becoming both more painfully obvious as it becomes more blatant, and more patently clear that there are no practical ways to actually change anything with respect to that social situation, I have concluded that we should go through the paradigm shifting in our perception of political science to accept understanding how and why that IS the case!
I submit that one can only become sufficiently convinced of the degree to which the social facts ARE as described in that "awesome" article above by going THROUGH the paradigm shifting processes that STOPS perceiving the world using false fundamental dichotomies and their related impossible ideals, regarding how political processes work, or ever could work. I suggest that we should go BEYOND being cynical or sarcastic, because those attitudes still presume upon the bogus validity of believing in the bullshit of false fundamental dichotomies and their related impossible ideals. I assert that better understanding of human systems as general energy systems can enable us to understand why good analysis always reveals that human realities are organized lies operating robberies. Furthermore, that perception then means that the only ways to cope with those facts is to work towards better dynamic equilibria between the different systems of those organized lies operating robberies.
Nobody can "stop" money being measurement backed by murder. Anyone recommending that we should "stop" that is promoting the same old impossible ideals, which are guaranteed to backfire badly, and continue to cause the opposite things to actually happen in the real world. In my view, the reasons why we are still inside some states of mixtures of cynical sarcasm is that we are still operating within our collectively brainwashing to believe in the biggest bullies' bullshit world view, which perceived politics through false fundamental dichotomies, and therefore, tends towards recommending bogus "solutions" based on impossible ideals.
I am not sure that the human species will survive to have enough time to grow up, or mature to not being so childish. However, IF that is possible, then we would have to go through a series of intellectual scientific revolutions with respect to the basic ways that we perceive and discuss the political economy. We have already reached the point where the runaway systems of the government being the biggest form of organized crime, controlled by the best organized gangs of criminals, have no ways to be "stopped." Indeed, in my view, that is an impossible ideal, which is surely never going to work. Rather, I think that we are going to have to hope to be able to survive through towards enough people understanding sufficiently how and why we have ended up with the currently existing situation, where the biggest gangsters, the banksters, actually control the government, which government therefore manifests as the biggest overall form of organized crime.
At the present time, all of the publicly significant religions and ideologies are based on false fundamental dichotomies, which support impossible ideals as their bogus "solutions" for these problems. Certainly, there should come some point where more fully facing the social facts finally goes THROUGH that Looking Glass of our Bizarro Mirror World, to better understand how and why that situation developed, and what could be done about that which was not based on promoting the same old-fashioned impossible ideals as the basis for some better resolutions of those social situations.
In my view, people are not getting remotely close to becoming cynical and sarcastic enough, because they still want to hold on to their sets of favourite false fundamental dichotomies, and related impossible ideals, which is why they feel disappointed to discover the degree to which the biggest gangsters are the banksters, which have captured control over the powers of government, and thereby been able to effectively privatize those powers of government.
Rather, we should begin with the concept of relative SUBTRACTION, which then generates the concept of ROBBERY. From that perspective then, everyone has some power to rob, and to kill to back that up, as the most extreme form of robbery. Sovereignty is based on that power to rob. Governments have developed through the history of warfare to assemble and channel the power to rob. Those powers of sovereign states have had their control captured by the people who were the best organized gangsters, applying the methods of organized crime to the political processes.
That has resulted in the empirically observed situation, where corporations like Goldman Sachs have effectively captured control over the powers of governments, so that those powers were privatized in ways which serve the interests of Goldman Sachs. What I am proposing is a general scientific theory to understand how and why that happened, which theory then does not collapse back to the same old-fashioned religions and ideologies, promoting the same impossible ideals as the bogus basis for the "solutions" to these political problems. The more that one learns about how the banksters are controlling current civilization, the worse that gets: "No matter how cynical you become, it's never enough to keep up!" Rather, we are reaching the point where we have to go through a profound paradigm shift regarding how we perceive politics in order to cope with discovering the real social facts.
"The best mind-altering drug is truth," and we need much more RADICAL TRUTHS to comprehend and deal with the degree to which our civilization has obviously become based on integrated systems of legalized lies, backed by legalized violence, in which situation the biggest gangsters control governments.
That, or being all in cash.
#1: Exterminate Central Banks!
"he was overthrown in an army coup" synonyms: seizure of power, coup d'état, putsch, overthrow, takeover, deposition
Who pays for the debt...you might think that would matter.
So, how is Goldman powerful then, when they can't stop such a leak?
Also, who's to say she's not in on the gig. GS appears invincible in the staged fight and people don't even bother to fuck with them...
The day the Squid is hauled off to jail for so much as a parking ticket, we'll know that things are different and that perhaps they should start looking up the meaning of the word fear.
If they didn't care, they wouldn't fight Segarra in court
Perhaps this time they won't. Unless they succeed in shutting down info sharing. (which is the aim).
Not one country on this planet has need of a Central Bank. Period. Every nation has the power to issue their own currency. So WTF does anyone need these guys for?
Money changers is the clue. Why does a nation allow the creation of their own currency tied to debt? Insane.
For fellow Canadians ponder why the Bank of Canada does not issue our money?
Your corner bank branch creates 97% of the money
In communism, central bank creates all the money
I was trying to explain that commercial banks create most of the money by monetizing the real output of the economy. The system does not necessarily need a central bank
I can't wait to see CNBCs in depth, hard-hitting, expose outing these criminals this week. Wait, what's that? CNBC plans on looping Shark Tank re-runs all week?
Why, simply everybody identifies with the panel of downright mean spirited rich folk
Oh, there's a way to fix it alright. Thing is, it involves guns and ropes and a lot of blood and a good deal of dying, and no one seems to have any stomach for that these days.
Plus, revolution is damned dangerous business. Never know how it ends up. Could get better or worse, depending.
Collapse is not so great either. You end up starving or dying of a cut if you are not very well prepared. You might get shot for those preps too.
All in, it's a shitshow for sure. But how many are willing to get it over with so our children can have someti=hing like a decent life??
It's coming anyway. I'll take as many as I can with me. No one gets out alive.
But it won't be pretty when your dollars are near worthless.
Karma's a bitch.
People appear shocked when I say I want to witness SHTF, no matter how painful. I have no children and nothing to lose. I will be disappointed if this shit drags on longer than I do.
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1107/1107.5728v2.pdf
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fayl3nEEK5U#t=28
Goldman Sachs Warns Investors About Tar Sands By Rail Challenges While Investing in Tar Sands By Rail GOLDMAN HIDES SANTANDER DEBT OFF BOOK
GOLDMAN HIDES GREEK DEBT OFF BOOK
http://solari.com/00archive/doc/caf/Business_Week-27Nov1989.pdf
Warnings about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac go back to the late 90's! On Jan 26, 2005, Chuck Hagel introduced a bill 'Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005' with cosponsors John Sununu and Elizabeth Dole. John McCain signed on as cosponsor May 25, 2006.
The bill apparently stalled/died along the way. It was resurrected as S. 1100, Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005', Never let a good political kill switch crisis go to waste.
Daily Koz post S190 was discussed in the Senate Banking Committee on July 28, 2005 with the result, "Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably", which I believe is Congress speak for, "we don't like this, please go rewrite it and we may reconsider", i.e., the bill died in a Republican controlled committee and never came to the floor of the Senate or back to the Senate Banking Committee for reconsideration. S190 died in committee. The toxic sausage was a gamed tool box operation only. Once the language was out from the revision it was feeding time.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/dot.comments/2008/09/mccains_gamble.html
You are so weird .....
It seems they never heard of Maçonaria ...
hehe.
we're all gonna end up destitute unless we throw these people in the slammer !
Janet, send me my $3 Million tax free.