One 77-year-old’s search for the truth: 9/11, election fraud, illegal wars, Wall Street criminality, a stolen nuke, the neocon wars, control of the U.S. government by global corporations, the unjustified assault on Social Security, media complicity, and the "Great Recession" about to become the second Great Depression. "The most important truths are hidden from us by the powerful few who strive to steal the American dream by keeping We the People in the dark."
Monday, January 14, 2013
If only every American could watch these interviews and understand what is said here, millions would take to the streets when Obama and the Congress get set pass the "Grand Bargain," which is truly the "Grand Betrayal" -- aka legislative theft of American's social safety net. Bill Black is one of the top economists in the country and also a white-colar criminologist who sent over a thousand savings-and-loan CEOs to jail in the early 1990's for kind of financial crimes now committed with impunity by today's "too-big-to-fail" banks, whose CEOs have been rewarded, rather than jailed for their mega-crimes, protected by the likes of Tim Geithner and Jack Lew. Matt Taibbi is an investigative reporter who has been exposing in Rolling Stone magazine the criminality of the big banks and the government that coddles them.
FRIDAY, JANUARY 11, 2013 Original Here
"Failure of Epic Proportions": Treasury Nominee Jack Lew’s Pro-Bank, Austerity, Deregulation Legacy
Former bank regulator William Black and Rolling Stone’s Matt Taibbi join us to dissect the career of Jack Lew, President Obama’s pick to replace Treasury Secretary Timothy Geither. Currently Obama’s chief of staff, Lew was an executive at Citigroup from 2006 to 2008 at the time of the financial crisis. He backed financial deregulation efforts while he headed the Office of Management and Budget under President Bill Clinton. During that time, Clinton enacted two key laws to deregulate Wall Street: the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999 and the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000. Black, a white-collar criminologist and former senior financial regulator, is the author of "The Best Way to Rob a Bank Is to Own One." A contributing editor for Rolling Stone magazine, Taibbi is the author of "Griftopia: A Story of Bankers, Politicians, and the Most Audacious Power Grab in American History." [Original includes rush transcript]
FRIDAY, JANUARY 11, 2013 Original Here
Matt Taibbi & William Black on Bailout Secrets & How New Foreclosure Deal Spares Banks from Justice
Four years after the massive bailout that rescued Wall Street, we look at the state of the financial sector with Rolling Stone’s Matt Taibbi and former financial regulator William Black. In a new article for Rolling Stone, Taibbi argues the government did not just bail out Wall Street, but also lied on the financial sector’s behalf, calling unhealthy banks healthy and helping banks cover up how much aid they were getting. The government’s approach to the banks came under new scrutiny this week after it reached an $8.5 billion settlement for improprieties in the wrongful foreclosures on millions of American homeowners, including flawed paperwork, robo-signing and wrongly modified loans. The settlement will end an independent review of all foreclosures, meaning the banks could be avoiding billions of dollars in further penalties, in addition to criminal prosecution. [Original includes rush transcript]
Monday, August 06, 2012
AWARD-WINNING INVESTIGATIVE REPORTERS DONALD BARTLETT AND JAMES STEELE EXPLAIN HOW AMERICA'S MIDDLE CLASS HAS BEEN DECIMATED OVER THE YEARS DUE TO POLICIES GOVERNING NOT ONLY TAXES BUT ALSO BANK REGULATIONS, TRADE DEFICITS, AND PENSION FUNDS.
http://www.democracynow.org/2012/7/30/pulitzer_winning_reporting_duo_don_barlett
Guests:James Steele, contributing editor at Vanity Fair. Steele and his reporting partner Donald Barlett have won virtually every major national journalism award, including two Pulitzer Prizes and two National Magazine Awards. Their latest book is The Betrayal of the American Dream.
Donald Barlett, contributing editor at Vanity Fair. Barlett and his reporting partner James Steele have won virtually every major national journalism award, including two Pulitzer Prizes and two National Magazine Awards. Their latest book is The Betrayal of the American Dream.
Thursday, October 07, 2010
It Seems that Those Who "Let It Happen" Will Never Be Prosecuted
No. It's not against the law for politicians to screw up.
BY JOSHUA E. KEATING | SEPTEMBER 30, 2010
Iceland's parliament voted this week to refer former Prime Minister Geir Haarde to a special court where he may face charges of criminal negligence during the collapse of the country's financial sector, which left taxpayers on the hook for billions of dollars in debt. According to a government investigation, Haarde's administration missed a number of specific opportunities in 2008 to limit the damage of the impending banking meltdown to the greater Icelandic economy. If convicted, Haarde could potentially face up to two years in jail. Could U.S. officials ever face charges for the market crash and the ensuing recession?
No. Even if it could be proved that regulatory decisions or lax oversight in the run-up to the crash directly contributed to the chaos that followed, former President George W. Bush, former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, and other officials probably don't have much to worry about. The century-old Icelandic law under which Haarde might be charged -- which has never before been invoked -- stipulates that ministers can be held responsible not just for actions that put the country in danger, but for not taking action to prevent that danger. There's simply no equivalent crime in the United States -- officials can't be held legally responsible for simply doing a bad job.
They're probably safe from civil lawsuits as well. Under U.S. law, government officials are granted immunity for actions conducted during the course of their duties, unless they knowingly violate "clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known." So unless U.S. regulators were purposely colluding with companies to defraud investors, they can't be held responsible.
That might change, however. The doctrine of official immunity is being challenged by convicted terrorist Jose Padilla's lawsuit against former Justice Department lawyer John Yoo. Padilla has accused Yoo of violating his constitutional rights by writing a memo when at the Office of Legal Counsel arguing that the U.S. citizen be classified as an enemy combatant and writing others arguing that these combatants could be subjected to "enhanced interrogation techniques." Over the Obama administration's objections, a California judge denied Yoo's request to have the suit thrown out on the basis of official immunity. The motion has been appealed, but in order for Padilla to receive damages, he will have to prove that not only did Yoo give bad legal advice, but that he knowingly or incompetently overlooked constitutional rights that no one could possibly dispute -- a tough standard to meet.
The private ratings agencies and investment banks involved in the subprime mortgage crisis don't have quite the same legal protections as government officials and are fighting suits from state and federal regulators.
Iceland's law is pretty unique, but countries under the Westminster system -- those based on the British parliament -- traditionally operate under a principle of "ministerial responsibility." This holds that ministers are responsible for the actions of the personnel in their ministry and are expected to resign in cases of gross incompetence or face charges for criminal actions, even if they weren't directly involved in the deed. In practice, this is almost never enforced anymore.
So while Iceland may have started a trend as the first government to collapse because of the financial crisis, we probably won't be seeing more heads of state following Haarde into the dock.
Thanks to Peter Schuck, professor emeritus at Yale Law School, Zephyr Teachout, associate professor at the Fordham University School of Law, and Scott Nelson, attorney at Public Citizen.
Thursday, September 10, 2009
Can the American Economy Possibly Get Any Worse? Yes, and It Absolutely Will! ...Except for Those with Incomes in the Top 10%.


Recession Over? Depends on Who You Ask
by Mark Brenner
(Original article in Labor Notes September 2009 Issue)
Unemployment was already nearing 10 percent in March during this Detroit job fair. Now the Fed says it will stay there into next year, yet orthodox economists are saying the worst is over. When the Labor Department announced that a quarter million jobs were lost in July, the news was greeted with cheers and backslapping on Wall Street. One week later the Federal Reserve declared the worst was over -- we were on our way out of the recession.
Almost as an afterthought, the Fed also predicted that unemployment would stay close to 10 percent until the end of 2010.
If the jobless won't get a break for more than a year, what explains the sighs of relief from Washington and the celebrations on Wall Street? How is the recession over?
Our Pain, Their Gain
Recovery, it turns out, is in the eye of the beholder. And the government's statisticians -- together with most of the media -- put a lot more weight on the corporate bottom line than on workers' day-to-day. To make matters worse, our pain has been their gain.
Productivity rose 6.3 percent economy-wide between April and June. This means fewer people were doing more work, which helps explain why companies from Ford to Caterpillar to IBM reported healthy profits.
Businesses got back in the black by shedding workers, cutting hours, and eliminating everything from vending machines to health benefits. Employers have also used the lousy job market -- and the fear and uncertainty that creates -- to wring more work out of the workforce, often for less pay. Nothing reminds someone he's over a barrel like the threat of being fired during the worst economy in living memory.
According to a recent poll by The Economist magazine, one in six U.S. workers have taken a pay cut. Last month close to 26 million workers were unemployed, when you include those forced to work part-time instead of full-time or those who've given up looking altogether. Sixteen states report double-digit employment, with a half dozen others close behind.
Meanwhile, the financial giants who needed nearly $2 trillion in taxpayer bailouts are flying high again. In July Goldman Sachs bagged the biggest quarterly profit in the company's history: $3.4 billion. Even AIG -- the insurance giant turned basket case -- showed its first profit in more than a year. No wonder the stock market has climbed 45 percent since March.
And Goldman Sachs is partying like it's 1999, not 2009. The company has already set aside more than $11.4 billion for bonuses this year, although corporate bigwigs warned employees "to make sure that we're not being seen living high on the hog," as one exec told the New York Post.
More to Come
Meanwhile, workers are worrying about whether there'll be money coming in this year, not how to spend it. There's little good news on the horizon.
Even though profits are up, there's little hope for a near-term burst of hiring. Managers will wait as long as possible to see if a rebound is really taking root.
And today's technology -- from supply chain management software to digital payroll records -- allows companies to add workers "just in time." In the past, firms hired in anticipation of an uptick; now they wait till new orders or higher sales are in hand. But with consumers grappling with mounds of debt, new spending and consumer confidence are still in the tank.
This is especially bad news for the long-term unemployed, workers who've been out of a job for more than six months. Last month more than a third of all unemployed workers fell into this category, the highest level since 1948. Moreover, close to half a million will exhaust their unemployment benefits by the end of September, and perhaps as many as 1.5 million by the end of this year.
Same Old, Same Old
So what will turn recession into a recovery for the rest of us?
For most of the last generation the economy worked according to a simple formula. The rich took the lion's share of economic growth, while the rest of us made ends meet through easy credit and by working longer hours.
Whenever recession threatened, the Federal Reserve lowered interest rates and bankers were more than happy to prime the pump by peddling more debt. Our economy stayed aloft thanks to credit cards and the stock market and housing bubbles.
But by 2000 Ronald Reagan's infamous trickle-down had completely dried up, and most workers stopped seeing even the meager gains of the 1980s and 1990s.
In fact, every bit of economic growth in the 21st century has gone to the top 10 percent -- those earning at least $109,000. Two-thirds was captured by the top 1 percent-folks earning more than $400,000.
Today's Great Recession should have been the curtain call for an economic model that has left most workers with less buying power than they had in the mid-1970s, swelled the ranks of the uninsured to 46 million, created income inequality not seen since the Great Depression, and left most of us drowning in debt.
But apparently no one in Washington got the memo. The government's top economists have been preoccupied with nursing Wall Street back to health so that the speculators can continue on their merry way unchanged. Goldman Sachs' top financial officer confirmed the back-to-business mentality, telling the business press, "Our model really never changed, we've said very consistently that our business model remained the same."
There was outrage, yes, when the government fattened the fat cats with our money, but it wasn't enough. So we'll keep hearing well-paid pundits crow about "recovery" as if 255 million working people didn't even exist.
Now watch Bill Moyers interview former senior banking regulator William K. Black. Dynamite!
Then watch these two short videos to see the direction the economy is going out in San Diego. More dynamite!
Thursday, May 14, 2009
Why isn't Obama turning to the Credit Unions?

Blogger's Note: I have been banking with the NRL Federal Credit Union for over 40 years with scarcely a glitch. One of my office mates, a technician, once served as an elected director of the NRLFCU. I believe that Mike served without pay and that the salaried officers are paid no more than standard Federal wages. Given the trillions of dollars recently lost by the largest banks, I am led to conclude that the competence (or honesty) of bank CEOs and managers decreases exponentially with the increasing magnitude their salaries, bonuses, stock options, and perks. So why is the government not restructuring the banks for which the taxpayers are now the majority stockholders (by virture of their being billed for the multi-trillion-dollar bailouts) along the lines of the nation's credit unions?
Why isn't Obama turning to the Credit Unions?
by Bob Fitrakis & Harvey Wasserman
May 12, 2009
As hundreds of our hard-earned billions are being poured into corrupt, greed-driven, lethally inefficient banks, the Administration, Congress and corporate media have studiously avoided the one sector of the banking industry that actually works---the credit unions.
Throughout the United States there are hundreds of these people-powered banks that have succeeded and prospered while all around them the traditional banking has collapsed into ruin, taking our general economy with them.
Why?
Because unlike those private banks, the America's 10,000 not-for-profit credit unions are controlled by the people who deposit their money there. Loans are made only to members. The deposits are federally insured, and investments are monitored by the depositors and, allegedly, by federal regulators.
For the most part, their decisions are made democratically. Their boards of directors are elected. Increasingly those decisions have been oriented funneling resources into new green industries whose future is bright, and that actually serve that public rather than raping it.
To be sure, there are those credit unions that are plagued with problems. Like all institutions, they all have their flaws. As creatures of the democratic process, they are capable of making wrong decisions while driving those involved stark raving mad.
But by basic mandate, credit unions are ACCOUNTABLE, a concept almost completely lacking from those mega-banks "too big to let fail."
In fact, Obama's fiscal 2010 budget contains $234.6 billion in Community Development Financial Institution funds. Some $113 billions is earmarked for "financial issues in underserved communities," according to the Treasury Department, along with another $80 million for the new Capital Magnet Fund aimed at "enhancing investments in affordable housing opportunities for the very poorest Americans." This money, says a May 7 Treasury Department release, "should be a boon to Credit Unions."
The numbers are a great improvement over the Bush era. But they pale alongside the torrent of cash slushing into failed private banks.
Since the founding of the first true credit unions in Germany beginning in 1852, the institutions have spread throughout Europe, India and North America. The first came to the US in New Hampshire in 1909.
Edward A. Filene, the Boston merchant whose famous basement offered bargain clothing to working people, Basic principles include the idea that only members can borrow money from a credit union, and that the loans must be "prudent and productive." Because loans involve the money of a close-knit group, and must be approved by members whose money is at risk, the credit unions are a model of how the banking system might be remade.
On average about 10 of the nation's 10,000 credit unions fail each year. Because depositors' money is federally guaranteed, they may lose their bank, but not their deposits.
--
Originally published by The Free Press (http://freepress.org).
Saturday, April 04, 2009
The Folks Who Brought You this Financial Meltdown Are Still at the Helm
In his column of 29 March, Paul Krugman recalls the Time Magazine cover from 10 years ago that glorified Robert Rubin, Alan Greenspan, and Larry Summers as the “Committee to Save the World” who had “prevented a global financial meltdown—(thus) far.” Time credited them with leading the global financial system through a crisis, which in Krugman’s words “seemed terrifying at the time, although it was a small blip compared with what we’re going through now.”
In his OpEdNews column of 27 March “History Lesson: And These Are the People We Expect to Fix Things Now?” Dave Lindorff recalls the event that opened the way for today’s financial meltdown. It was the repeal back in 1999 of the Glass-Steagall Act, which had been enacted expressly to prevent the very kinds of malpractice by banks and insurance companies that brought on the Great Depression. Much of Lindorff’s material was drawn from a 5 November 1999 article in the New York Times by Stephen Labaton, from which I’ve selected three quotes below.
Then-Treasury Secretary Larry Summers (who is presently Director of President Obama’s Economic Council and a chief architect of the current multi-trillion-dollar bailout/giveaway to A.I.G. and the giant banks):
''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. This historic legislation will better enable American companies to compete in the new economy.''
Senator Byron Dorgan, Democrat of North Dakota:
''I think we will look back in 10 years' time and say we should not have done this but we did because we forgot the lessons of the past, and that that which is true in the 1930's is true in 2010. I wasn't around during the 1930's or the debate over Glass-Steagall. But I was here in the early 1980's when it was decided to allow the expansion of savings and loans. We have now decided in the name of modernization to forget the lessons of the past, of safety and of soundness.''
Then-Senator Paul Wellstone, Democrat of Minnesota:
''Scores of banks failed in the Great Depression as a result of unsound banking practices, and their failure only deepened the crisis. Glass-Steagall was intended to protect our financial system by insulating commercial banking from other forms of risk. It was one of several stabilizers designed to keep a similar tragedy from recurring. Now Congress is about to repeal that economic stabilizer without putting any comparable safeguard in its place.''
The bill repealing Glass-Steagal1 was approved in the Senate by a vote of 90 to 8 and in the House by 362 to 57 and was signed into law by President Bill Clinton.
So now in 20:20 hindsight, who should President Obama choose to lead us out of this mess? Well, Paul Wellstone was killed in an airplane crash in 2002 (which many folks believe to have been suspitious). Thank God, Byron Dorgan was spared though. But, go figure ...Obama picked Summers! And also Geithner, who in 1999 was a protégé of Robert Rubin, another of the Time Magazine cover guys billed as the “Committee to Save the World.”
So the very same characters that got us into this mess have been tasked with getting us out of it ...and their idea seems to be to pump trillions of un-audited taxpayer dollars into the banking system that they personally set up to fail in the first place.
How many trillions? Well, in his 27 March OEN column “Obama’s Latest No Banker Left Behind Scheme,” Stephen Lendman does some totaling:
“So hyped by advance fanfare, Timothy Geithner unveiled his Public-Private Investment Program (PPIP) on March 23, the latest in a growing alphabet soup of handouts topping $12.5 trillion and counting - so much in so many forms, in "gov-speak" language, with so many changing and moving parts, it's hard for experts to keep up let alone the public, except to sense something is very wrong. They're being fleeced by a finance Ponzi scheme, sheer flimflam...”
Lendman’s article is almost encyclopedic at 7 pages, but one small paragraph near the end knocked my socks off! It was this mention of the sinister core of the financial crisis, the Credit Default Swaps (CDS), gleaned from an important cautionary article by Martin D. Weiss:
“...the money spent or committed by the government so far is also too much for another, relatively less-known reason: Hidden in an obscure corner of the derivatives market is a unique credit default swap that virtually no one is talking about — contracts on the default of United States Treasury bonds. Quietly and without fanfare, a small but growing number of investors are not only thinking the unthinkable, they're actually spending money on it, bidding up the premiums on Treasury bond credit default swaps to 14 times their 2007 level. This is an early warning of the next big shoe to drop in the debt crisis — serious potential damage to the credit, credibility, and borrowing power of the United States Treasury.”
The mainstream media repeatedly touts U.S. Treasuries as "ultra secure" investments. This makes me wonder... Are the "masters of the universe" and their media arm setting up to con Americans into transferring what little is left of their retirement savings into “ultra safe” Treasuries ...where they will be exposed the crash of the dollar? In such an event, the already ultra-rich bankers and hedge-fund managers would be positioned to make still another killing by cashing the CDS they’ve written against working America’s last stash. This day could well come if and when foreign governments sense the dollar is doomed and begin dumping their U.S. Treasury holdings.
But Paul Krugman in his column of April 2nd (thankfully not April 1st!) argues that the Chinese simply own too many T-bills ($2 trillion worth) to even think of selling them, knowing that this would create a panic causing the whole world to sell off their T-bills, instantly driving their values into the abyss (while kicking U.S. interest rates into the stratosphere). So I sure hope he’s right about “China’s Dollar Trap.”
Monday, January 26, 2009
VaR Reloaded: Hear it “From the Horses' Mouths”
No Mathematical Construct Is So Useful That It Can’t Be Misused by Greedy Bankers
Four blogs ago I introduced you to an essay by New York Times financial columnist, Joe Nocera, who told the tale of the Value at Risk (VaR) calculations that have been developed by physicists and mathematicians to model the risks facing equity traders and bank managers. Just six paragraphs into his highly informative article, Nocera writes: “Nassim Nicholas Taleb, the best-selling author of ‘The Black Swan,’ has crusaded against VaR for more than a decade. He calls it, flatly, ‘a fraud.’” (In fact, The Black Swan was the #1 Highest Selling Nonfiction book on Amazon published in all of 2007.)
In this 10-minute film you can listen to an interview with both Taleb and mathematician Benoit Mandelbrot, the father of fractal fractal geometry. Although coming at the problem from different directions, both are in agreement that what is yet to happen to the economy before it gets better is both unknown and unknowable, but surely includes possibilities far worse than any historical antecedent...




