Archive for Goldman Sachs

Bankergate: Emails Expose Criminal Financial Dictatorship At Work

Posted in Business, economic tyranny, Economy, Fiat Currency, International Bankers, New World Order, News, The Federal Reserve, Tyranny with tags , , , , , , , , , , , on February 25, 2010 by truthwillrise

Geithner may be thrown under the bus as financial terrorists continue to profit

Steve Watson
Prisonplanet.com
Monday, Jan 11, 2010

Bankergate: Emails Expose Criminal Financial Dictatorship At Work 110110GeithnerExplosive emails released last week could see Treasury secretary Timothy Geithner become embroiled in criminal charges for his role in a cover up that exposes the monumental criminality behind the $182.3 billion bailout of American International Group Inc.

In November and December 2008, The Federal Reserve Bank of New York instructed the bailed out AIG to hide from the public details regarding payments the insurance giant made to banks, including Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Societe Generale SA.

Using Fed secured taxpayer bailout money, AIG paid several banks 100 percent of the face value of credit-default swaps, as other financial institutions were negotiating deep discounts for the unregulated paper assets that do not have to be backed by cash.

The decision to pay the banks in full may have cost AIG, and therefore taxpayers, at least $13 billion over the odds.

The “backdoor bailout” of the banks, as it has been dubbed was exposed in March 2009 after the SEC challenged AIG’s filing, however, e-mails obtained by Representative Darrell Issa, ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, have re ignited the situation as they conclusively expose a collusion between AIG and the Fed to deceive the public.

The e-mails between company and regulator, released last Thursday, show that The New York Fed crossed out reference to the payments and that AIG also omitted the details when the Securities and Exchange Commission filing was made public on Dec. 24, 2008.

The emails, the content of which are highlighted in this Bloomberg News article, also show that the Fed wanted numerous other details about the AIG bailout withheld or delayed from public oversight.

“It appears that the New York Fed deliberately pressured AIG to restrict and delay the disclosure of important information,” said Issa, a California Republican. Taxpayers “deserve full and complete disclosure under our nation’s securities laws, not the withholding of politically inconvenient information.”

Bankergate: Emails Expose Criminal Financial Dictatorship At Work FOTR 340x1692

Despite denials from the Treasury and the New York Fed that Geithner was involved in the scandal, as the President of the New York Fed at the time, his head now rests firmly on the chopping block where he awaits his fate.

Issa is seeking more information from the New York Fed on the matter, following the statements of general counsel Thomas Baxter, who declared in a letter in defense of Geithner Friday “In my judgment, as the New York Fed’s chief legal officer, disclosure matters of this nature did not warrant the attention of the president.”

“It’s a staggering admission by Mr. Baxter that he felt strong enough that Secretary Geithner wanted him to limit AIG’s disclosures on counterparty payments to the SEC that he says he didn’t even feel a need to bring the details to his boss’ attention,” Issa said in a statement. “This letter raises more questions on the inner-workings of the New York Fed during one of the most pivotal periods in our nation’s history.”

Geithner’s extensive connections to Goldman Sachs also raise serious questions, given that the investment bank directly profited from the AIG payments.

Geithner’s predecessor and Treasury Secretary at the time all of this unfolded, Hank Paulson, also once served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer for Goldman Sachs, after working for the firm for decades.

Paulson rammed through the bailout of AIG with threats of financial armageddon and physical martial law, claiming he “felt the pain of AIG”, comments for which he was slammed by Republican Congressman Cliff Stearns earlier this year.

AIG’s outstanding debts to Goldman Sachs meant that $13 billion of the money handed over to AIG by Paulson went directly to Goldman Sachs.

Meanwhile, Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers — both investment banks in direct competition with Goldman Sachs — were not bailed out when bad debt forced them to cease operating under the same circumstances as AIG.

Congressman Stearns pressed Paulson on his conflicts of interest, stating, “Isn’t there some point where you say hey, I’ve got a conflict of interest here, you don’t feel any kind of scintilla of ethics on this thing at all?” Paulson responded by claiming that he got a waiver from the ethics agreement.

Paulson’s appointment, at the height of the financial crisis, of ex-Goldman Sachs executive Neel Kashkari to oversee the distribution of bailout monies also highlights the vast conflict of interest surrounding this scandal.

As the New York Times reported earlier this year, Goldman Sachs effectively bailed itself out. Since that time the bank has been making record profits on trading and now completely dominates the program trading market.

This blatantly criminal activity has led to Goldman being labeled “Financial Terrorists” by analysts. Even Rolling Stone magazine has exposed Goldman Sachs’ persistent role in steering and manipulating the economy over the last century.

At the time of the bailout we warned that the so called financial saviours represented nothing more than the old guard of the corporate elite, the very people responsible for the financial crisis in the first instance.

Judge Andrew Napolitano, appearing on Shepard Smith’s Fox News show last week, stated that he believes Geithner could face a criminal probe:

Barney Frank, a Massachusetts Democrat and chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, said the e-mail exchanges were “troubling” and that he plans to hold congressional hearings on the matter.

Watch Alex Jones breakdown “bankergate” in detail:

Putting Obama on Hold, in a Hint of Who’s Boss

Posted in Business, economic tyranny, Economy, International Bankers, New World Order, News, Shadow Government, The Constitution with tags , , , , on December 15, 2009 by truthwillrise

By ANDREW ROSS SORKIN

Published: December 14, 2009

President Obama didn’t exactly look thrilled as he stared at the Polycom speakerphone in front of him. “Well, I appreciate you guys calling in,” he began the meeting at the White House with Wall Street’s top brass on Monday.
He was, of course, referring to the three conspicuously absent attendees who were being piped in by telephone: Lloyd C. Blankfein, the chief executive of Goldman Sachs; John J. Mack, chairman of Morgan Stanley; and Richard D. Parsons, chairman of Citigroup.

Their excuse? “Inclement weather,” according to the White House. More precisely, fog delayed flights into Reagan National Airport. (In the “no good deed goes unpunished” category, the absent bankers were at least self-aware enough to try to fly commercial.)

That awkward moment on speakerphone in the White House, for better or worse, spoke volumes about how the balance of power between Wall Street and Washington has shifted again, back in Wall Street’s favor.

Now that Citigroup has given back its bailout money — and Wells Fargo announced late on Monday that it would, too — whatever leverage Washington had over the financial services industry seems to be quickly eroding.
Executive compensation, leverage limits and lending standards were all issues that Washington said it planned to change — and when the taxpayers were the shareholders of these firms, it probably could have done so. But now the White House has been left in the position of extending invitations, rather than exercising its clout. And in the figurative and literal sense, it is getting stood up.

Those who attended the meeting — Jamie Dimon of JPMorgan flew down on a private jet and didn’t take any heat for it — seemed to talk a good game, but even President Obama acknowledged they might have been just toying with him.

“The problem is there’s a big gap between what I’m hearing here in the White House and the activities of lobbyists on behalf of these institutions or associations of which they’re a member up on Capitol Hill,” he said after the discussion.
Are we making too much of this meeting and its grounded attendees?

The meeting was always just going to be political theater. Wall Street bankers were supposed to play their part on the public stage in Washington, and submit to a scolding from the president about bonuses and the need to start lending more to help get the economy moving.

But inevitably public perception will issue its harsh ruling, and it goes something like this: If the meeting were really that important to Mr. Blankfein, Mr. Mack and Mr. Parsons, they would have found a way to get there.

They would have left the night before, or they would have flown out at the crack of dawn, or better yet, taken Amtrak (I called customer service, and the Acela was running only a couple of minutes late).

In fairness, there is little question that they wanted to be there and seemed genuinely disappointed they couldn’t make it. (You could hear it in Mr. Mack and Mr. Blankfein’s voice when they got on the call. “Mr. President, we’re upset we’re not able to be there, but we’re on line with you now,” Mr. Mack said. “It’s certainly not for a lack of effort,” Mr. Blankfein quickly followed up.)

But this missed meeting clearly didn’t help their case.
After all, they sure hoofed it down there last year, when Henry M. Paulson Jr. ordered them to meet him in Washington with less than 24 hours of notice. Most of them got there early, and went home with $10 billion to $25 billion of taxpayer money.

Upon hearing the news Monday morning of the airplane delays, Mark Haines, an anchor at CNBC, went on the air and, in a Howard Beale moment, said what many Americans were probably thinking: “These guys are such little girls! Give me a break. What a bunch of wimps! Thanks for all that taxpayer money … and, ah, gee, there are delays at the airport!”

But extra effort may have been a lot to ask given the blasting headwinds they were flying into down in Washington.

President Obama’s “60 Minutes” interview Sunday night eviscerating Wall Street laid down the not-so-welcome mat. “I did not run for office to be helping out a bunch of fat-cat bankers,” he said.

Inside the Obama administration, there were bruised feelings about the need for a conference call to have a meeting.
“It was pretty nervy,” one staff member told me.
That’s not to say that Mr. Blankfein, Mr. Mack and Mr. Parsons have not been trying to be constructive.

Mr. Mack has been particularly outspoken about the need for serious financial reform on Wall Street. Mr. Parsons, too, has been trying to act as a liaison with Washington and has not pushed back on legislation.

And Mr. Blankfein, who is under perhaps the hottest spotlight, has been saying many of the right things, though he probably can’t say enough of them at the moment.
But as President Obama has said, it is not what those leaders say to him that really matters.

“The way I see it, having recovered with the help of the
American government and the American taxpayers, our banks now have a greater obligation to the goal of a wider recovery, a more stable system, and more broadly shared prosperity,” Mr. Obama said.

There’s an expression that many bankers already know, and might want to keep in mind if they are summoned to Washington again. The saying is often trotted out on Wall Street when people need to be reminded of the importance of getting on a plane and seeing a client: “You can’t fax a handshake.”

Putting Obama on Hold, in a Hint of Who’s Boss

Posted in 1 with tags , , , , , , , , , , , on December 5, 2009 by truthwillrise

By ANDREW ROSS SORKIN

Published: December 14, 2009

President Obama didn’t exactly look thrilled as he stared at the Polycom speakerphone in front of him. “Well, I appreciate you guys calling in,” he began the meeting at the White House with Wall Street’s top brass on Monday.
He was, of course, referring to the three conspicuously absent attendees who were being piped in by telephone: Lloyd C. Blankfein, the chief executive of Goldman Sachs; John J. Mack, chairman of Morgan Stanley; and Richard D. Parsons, chairman of Citigroup.

Their excuse? “Inclement weather,” according to the White House. More precisely, fog delayed flights into Reagan National Airport. (In the “no good deed goes unpunished” category, the absent bankers were at least self-aware enough to try to fly commercial.)

That awkward moment on speakerphone in the White House, for better or worse, spoke volumes about how the balance of power between Wall Street and Washington has shifted again, back in Wall Street’s favor.

Now that Citigroup has given back its bailout money — and Wells Fargo announced late on Monday that it would, too — whatever leverage Washington had over the financial services industry seems to be quickly eroding.
Executive compensation, leverage limits and lending standards were all issues that Washington said it planned to change — and when the taxpayers were the shareholders of these firms, it probably could have done so. But now the White House has been left in the position of extending invitations, rather than exercising its clout. And in the figurative and literal sense, it is getting stood up.
Those who attended the meeting — Jamie Dimon of JPMorgan flew down on a private jet and didn’t take any heat for it — seemed to talk a good game, but even President Obama acknowledged they might have been just toying with him.

“The problem is there’s a big gap between what I’m hearing here in the White House and the activities of lobbyists on behalf of these institutions or associations of which they’re a member up on Capitol Hill,” he said after the discussion.
Are we making too much of this meeting and its grounded attendees?

The meeting was always just going to be political theater. Wall Street bankers were supposed to play their part on the public stage in Washington, and submit to a scolding from the president about bonuses and the need to start lending more to help get the economy moving.

But inevitably public perception will issue its harsh ruling, and it goes something like this: If the meeting were really that important to Mr. Blankfein, Mr. Mack and Mr. Parsons, they would have found a way to get there.

They would have left the night before, or they would have flown out at the crack of dawn, or better yet, taken Amtrak (I called customer service, and the Acela was running only a couple of minutes late).

In fairness, there is little question that they wanted to be there and seemed genuinely disappointed they couldn’t make it. (You could hear it in Mr. Mack and Mr. Blankfein’s voice when they got on the call. “Mr. President, we’re upset we’re not able to be there, but we’re on line with you now,” Mr. Mack said. “It’s certainly not for a lack of effort,” Mr. Blankfein quickly followed up.)

But this missed meeting clearly didn’t help their case.
After all, they sure hoofed it down there last year, when Henry M. Paulson Jr. ordered them to meet him in Washington with less than 24 hours of notice. Most of them got there early, and went home with $10 billion to $25 billion of taxpayer money.

Upon hearing the news Monday morning of the airplane delays, Mark Haines, an anchor at CNBC, went on the air and, in a Howard Beale moment, said what many Americans were probably thinking: “These guys are such little girls! Give me a break. What a bunch of wimps! Thanks for all that taxpayer money … and, ah, gee, there are delays at the airport!”

But extra effort may have been a lot to ask given the blasting headwinds they were flying into down in Washington.

President Obama’s “60 Minutes” interview Sunday night eviscerating Wall Street laid down the not-so-welcome mat. “I did not run for office to be helping out a bunch of fat-cat bankers,” he said.

Inside the Obama administration, there were bruised feelings about the need for a conference call to have a meeting.
“It was pretty nervy,” one staff member told me.
That’s not to say that Mr. Blankfein, Mr. Mack and Mr. Parsons have not been trying to be constructive.
Mr. Mack has been particularly outspoken about the need for serious financial reform on Wall Street. Mr. Parsons, too, has been trying to act as a liaison with Washington and has not pushed back on legislation.

And Mr. Blankfein, who is under perhaps the hottest spotlight, has been saying many of the right things, though he probably can’t say enough of them at the moment.
But as President Obama has said, it is not what those leaders say to him that really matters.

“The way I see it, having recovered with the help of the American government and the American taxpayers, our banks now have a greater obligation to the goal of a wider recovery, a more stable system, and more broadly shared prosperity,” Mr. Obama said.

There’s an expression that many bankers already know, and might want to keep in mind if they are summoned to Washington again. The saying is often trotted out on Wall Street when people need to be reminded of the importance of getting on a plane and seeing a client: “You can’t fax a handshake.”

Max Keiser on Alex Jones 8/6/2009: The Fed’s Dirty Little Secret is Out!

Posted in Alex Jones, economic tyranny, Economy, Fiat Currency, International Bankers, New World Order, The Federal Reserve with tags , , , , , , , , , , , on August 14, 2009 by truthwillrise