This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Dallas Fed Admits "For The Next Eight Months, The Nation’s Central Bank Will Be Monetizing The Federal Debt", Opens Door To Bernanke Impeachment
Time to begin the Chairman impeachment proceedings. It is one thing for blogs like Zero Hedge to argue (rightly) for the past 1.5 years that the Fed's actions in the Treasury space are nothing but direct debt monetizations. After all, one can always argue semantics, as some peers have enjoyed doing in the past. Yet when an actual Federal Reserve Fed President, in this case Dallas Fed's Dick Fisher states it without any trace of hiding the underlying intent, then things get a little serious. To wit: "For the next eight months, the nation’s central bank will be monetizing the federal debt." It gets worse: even though Fisher realizes that what he is doing is unconstitutional, he also admits that the Fed's actions are now is effectively a policy tool: "Here is the message: The Fed is going out of its way to be a good citizen. It is time for the Congress to do the same." In other words, the myth of the Fed's political independence is now destroyed. All pretense has now gone out of the window as the Fed realizes this is the last "all in" bet. If this fails, it is over. Yet maybe someone in power can precipitate this much needed reset. After all it was Ben Bernanke who testified under oath that the "Federal Reserve will not monetize the debt." It is time he is impeached and prosecuted for this lie.
Video courtesy of Karl Denninger
»
- 25693 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Stop the looting, start prosecuting.
Though he could say he was sincere at the time and things have changed.
The day he testified to that effect was a POMO day. If buying Treasuries through the QE2 mechanism is debt monetization, then it was then, too. Why stop at impeachment, though? I suggest sedition charges.
Operation Date: 06/03/2009 Operation: Coupon Purchase Settlement Date: 06/04/2009 Maturity/Call Date Range: 05/15/2016 - 02/15/2019 Total Par Accepted:* 7,500 Total Par Amt Submitted:* 21,114I am worried that he will be immune because of "national security" issues. But I will stay tuned.
Not to be too hyperbolic, but he's not going to be so immune once a REAL national security issue arises, of the small-arms ballistic variety. I'd really, really, really rather avoid that eventuality (though I'm ready for it -- been training with a sniper team leader). On balance, national security would be greatly improved without Bernanke, and I hope that Congress can come to understand that.
Well the People's Revolutionary Taskforce is ready. We have been saving up, rotten eggs, rotten tomatoes, custard cream pies, rolled up newspapers and protest signs and tar and feathers. On a serious note however, I have been wondering about the personal safety of these men as things move forward. The problem won't come from the militias. It will come from some man who has lost it all, a man who works on wall street, a man with a nice suit of clothes on and looking like he fits in with all of them and in that day, he will walk up to them and do what he has been planning to do. This is the way it will happen, I think. Would I feel sorry for these thieves and liars? Not one bit. The smartest man that ever lived penned some thoughts on this one time. A man called Solomon, King of Israel said in the good book:
Ecclesiastes 31 To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven:
2 A time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted;
3 A time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up;
4 A time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance;
5 A time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together; a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing;
6 A time to get, and a time to lose; a time to keep, and a time to cast away;
7 A time to rend, and a time to sew; a time to keep silence, and a time to speak;
8 A time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war, and a time of peace.
Do I think its about time? Yes it is way past time.
I agree, re the possibility of someone going postal on these guys. That is a decidedly suboptimal outcome, though. Much better to try to work within the law. Devolution towards anarchy would suck, to put it mildly.
We've got way too many laws, and way too many laws that are selectively enforced, or not at all; rebuilding the entire legal system wouldn't be a fun task, though. I know this from experience, having worked with some attorneys who were hired to help develop the legal systems of some African nations.
Melvin Purvis, the FBI agent of Dillinger fame, when informed that he had inoperable cancer, took his own life with the very service pistol that was given to him @ his resignation party.
There are tens of thousands of citizens - current/ex-military & civilians - who find out each year that their time will shortly be up. Just wait until more rationale 'Joseph Stacks' appear who want to make a statement on the way out.
No estate tax this year.
It is sad to think that the only way a person like Bernanke can be stopped is through a somewhat-less-than-pleasant-means. Bernanke is not all-that. He has made plenty of political enemies. They will deal with him soon enough.
Money is a very dangerous substance, similar to hydromorphone. It can do a lot of good, and it can do a lot of harm. People who have earned a great deal of money and have funneled it into decent charitable causes understand this. I call it the "toxicity of money" problem. Giving away vast sums of money to people who do not understand the safe handling of money only creates a very large problem for all those in close proximity to the money. The only way to solve this particular upcoming money event is to create a new form of money and detox everyone off of dollars, like what Abraham Lincoln did.
That's enough Clark-wisdom for tonight.
Yes, The Steinbrenner LoopHole...
I sometimes wonder how Rubin, Greenspan, Bernanke, Blankfein, Dimon, Geithner and other assorted villians walk the streets without looking over their shoulders constantly. I suppose if you have no conscience then you don't worry about such things.
They all have "security". certainly Jamie, Bernanke and Geithner do. Let's keep them all healthy. Let's let the process, no matter how painful and agonizing, work its way through.
What would Sharron Angle do. Was that the 2nd amendment ???
Walk the streets? What makes you think they walk streets. They live in gated communities or tightly restricted buildings. Their Limos deliver them door-to-door wherever they go. When they travel, it is by private jet or other manner, but private none the same.
They're whores aren't they?
Q.E.D.
You betcha'....but for sure not streetwalkers.
Bill Dudley, president of the New York FED, yesterday morning on the radio:
" I took the subway this weekend. I come into the theater a lot. I live in New Jersey, but I come into the theater a lot. So when my wife and I come into the theater, we'll offen times we either walk or we take the subways."
That's not gonna last much longer.
Oh you are Executive Outcomes guy :)
"Devolution towards anarchy would suck"
Rephrased:
"Devoution towards Liberty would not suck"
Explain the difference please.
Speaking of snipers. I was reading the other day about the greatest sniper that ever lived, Carlos Hathcock. They finally broke down and gave him a silver star not long before he died of MS, but for the things this man did, especially that last gig he did where he took out that NVA General, I think they should have given him the Medal of Honor. This man was just unbelievable.
http://www.modernamericanheroes.com/2010/07/13/the-story-of-legendary-sn...
Not to denigrate Hathcock's achievements, but he was the greatest American sniper that ever lived.
That dubious honor goes to a Finn: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simo_H%C3%A4yh%C3%A4
Well put...and duly noted, you are not being disrespectful of Hathcock...he was one of the best American snipers that ever lived.
However, Simo was fighting for his home.
One wonders if Hathcock & Simo's roles were reversed what the "score" would be ;-)
I can't comment on the conditions Simo operated in with any authority. Weather obviously about 180 degrees apart. Terrain dramatically different, too. Desolate and open vs. dense and teeming with life and distractions. Hathcock was hunting guerrilla warriors - hunters themselves whose movements were careful and clandestine. I can tell you how scary and difficult the jungle is, especially at night, and especially alone. And Hathcock was very alone for very long periods of time. I long ago read a story about White Feather's kill of the General. It was that mission when he encountered he snake while belly crawling across a grassy plain near the enemy perimeter while trying to set his position for the kill. He could not have raised up without being detected, and he was far behind enemy lines. Extraordinary skill and courage was required just to get to the place the viper was; nerves of steel required to look death in the eye and stare death down.
Hathcock earned his place in the hall of hero's. He was humble, as most true ones are. There are so many amazing feats of heroism and honor that took place there long ago. As an old grunt, I am still in awe of some of the chopper pilots who flew into hot LZ's and of the special ops guys who routinely did things that you couldn't even make up.
There is also no doubt in my mind that our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan are every bit as courageous and dedicated. Unfortunately, our ranks of heroes continues to grow.......Simper Fi, Hathcock.
The Finnish Army formed the Axis northern front during the Nazi siege of Staligrad. The Finns are responsible for the death of millions of Russian civilians. Funny how they were given a pass for their war crimes by the Allies. Simo shot a lot of russian Civilians.
Hathcock fought for a colonizing army attempting to take over the resource concessions vacated by the French and Japanese. The US lost the Vietnam war because the majority of Vietnamese did not want another colonial army lording over them, looting their country and setting them up to be a buffer in a future conflict with China.
Hatchcock also never had to endure the overwhelming odds faced by Russian snipers during the seige at Stalingrad. His time in Vietnam was a vacation in comparrison.
Got no argument with your summation, except maybe the vacation part. All war is hell. Fear and death and destruction - all relative to what going on in your personal situation. I personally would prefer to die in a nice warm jungle than a frozen tundra, but hey, I hate cold weather.
Fear, Fatigue, Failure, and Frustration.
I'm still trying to find 3d SOG's original brief.
- Ned
It's buried up route 9 on a little hill called Khe Sanh....the last gasp.
Leningrad.
I just cannot let this pass.
Read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Finland
http://finland.fi/Public/default.aspx?contentid=160058&nodeid=41806&cult...
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0107513.html
Also in addition I have to state that there was a time called Great wrath brought on Finns by Russians (but this was log ago and was in the late era of the Swedish empire who used us as peasants and soldiers):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Wrath
Not a single Finnish soldier fighting for their country in WW2 ever set foot anywhere near Stalingrad. Leningrad is a different story.
Relation with the nazis is a subject of whose full details I do not know. We are usually told that this relation comes only from need of help against Russia that no other nation was ready to give. But there is so much history somewhere that is not speaked about. If my memory reserves me correctly our then president Ryti was sent to prison and then exiled, but I am not sure about that.
To my knowledge Simo only fought in Winter war and because he had to. Otherwise Simo would have been a farmer like his brother. In the war he was located in and near an area called Kollaa.
I respect him because he did what he had to do under an attack by the soviets. He was not fighting alongside nazis due to his injury (explosive bullet into the cheek and chin) in the winter war.
It's ironic Mr. Hathcock succumbed to MS...The antithesis of what was needed for his profession...Nerves of steel.
I find your post deplorable. Although I agree the country would be better off without Bernanke at the Fed's wheel, it is outrageous to raise the specter of assassination. This only directs further unwanted attention to this site.
Putting Pb on target at distance is a skill one simply doesn't advertise, indeed people with this skill don't wear day-glow colors. I don't mean to offend, but camouflage includes not running your mouth.
Which post? My post, where I note that I hope that Congress realizes that Bernanke needs to go?
If that's the case, you're reading things entirely wrong -- I'm fervently hoping that this gets resolved peacefully. The last thing we need is vigilanteism. The firearms training is for my food, and my protection if it comes to that.
....or have "trigger" in their names?
never happen
National Security...it may have to be redefined to include such threats as the entire country being enslaved by maniacs, and an example of just such a disingenuous ultra villain is dear old Ben.
By any measure of justice he should face a charge of Treason...and be found guilty.
"By any measure of justice he should face a charge of Treason...and be found guilty."
Indeed they will....whether in this life or the next!!!
In the world of private organized crime, the inside guys are not immune.......inside the .gov they are. Hope this advice is helpful.
a.k.a. "legalized mafia".
Are you taking names. CNBC does that too.
Bernanke will be "too big to fail", despite the criminality of his actions.
Bernanke is a pawn. The Fed will be too big to fail.
Nothing and no one is immune to sacrifice on the alter of political expediency. In the end, he who controls the military controls the nation. No banker has his own private army.
Oh contraire, Tax cuts of debate, do the elite get their cut ? Bailouts for who ? The bankers ? Who's their pimp ?
I want my bailout, I want it now. I don't want to pay taxes on it. Another war on a charge card. Just Do It ???
Print it for me Ben. Wow, just like a TV show. Greed is Good. Just Doing God's work. Yup.
The Fed is TBTF -
"Too Big To Fix".
Wait until the G20 is in full swing. Everyone expects Geithner to roll out the now-standard rhetoric: "A strong dollar is in America's best interest".
But this time things will be different. We have a Fed chief stating plain-as-day, "We are monetizing our debt".
LOL. Ok, Timmy, your move!
The G20 is going to be very interesting.
The Federal Penetentiary system came immunize us against him by locking him UP , then he will be the security issue . STOP THE LOOTING AND START PROSECUTING !
The Federal Penetentiary system can immunize us against him by locking him UP , then he will be the security issue . STOP THE LOOTING AND START PROSECUTING !
My money, if you will pardon the expression, is nothing happening. Nobody will give bernanke any legal shit and he isn't going to receive any punishment for compliance with policy objectives. The Fed's independence willbe reframed as circumstantial not mandatory. He'll get another time magazine cover out of it yet.
" sincere at the time and things have changed"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L9EKqQWPjyo&ob=av3e
I'm with KD on that as well, but that time has passed. The fraudsters no longer have their back against the wall.
Impeachment? So silly. You forget who is the master and who is the servant. All those whackos of yesteryear are finally being proven correct. You will lay in the bed you have made.
"Gimme a round of smoke at grid XXXXX"
KD notes that FX MArket Alerts is reporting Chinese capital controls, to wit:
REMARKS (9/11/10): FX Regulator - SAFE - will strictly manage companies' short-term foreign debt quotas. To regulate special-purpose vehicles overseas. To tighten control of foreign-invested equity capital. To strengthen audits of company's overseas fundraising. To 'strictly' punish non-compliant banks. To crack down on 'hot money'.
http://www.fxmarketalerts.com/free/document.aspx?codes=95bd2273-22da-4cd...
Many companies are in the peak of fighting the recession. Lay-off here and there. Modifications and other marketing strategies are being implemented to make sure that they can keep pace with the fast technology. There are companies continuesly innovating for them to be competent. Small companies that doesnt have enough fund would take installment loans and use the funds for company advancements.
Since the FED is a private corp why not prosecute Benny?
"The Fed, by it's own admission, is an independent entity within the government "having both public purposes, and private aspects". By "private aspects", they mean the entire operation is wholly-owned by private member banks, who are paid dividends of 6% each year on their stock. Furthermore, the Fed's decisions "do not have to be ratified by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branch of government" and the Fed "does not receive funding appropriated by Congress". In 1982, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals confirmed this view when it held that "federal reserve banks are not federal instrumentalities... but are independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporations".oops..
Bernanke is Too Big To Fail bitchez!
(first time saying 'bitchez' give me a break)
Gotta admire his chutzpah.
Have another drink Dick - non-voting members must remain outside the room during FOMC meetings
They're all in there. They just don't get to vote.
The FED has always been a rogue agent since the beginning in 1913, and she has never hidden it.
I just feel sorry right now for the dumb fucks who thought the FED was credible or that her intents were good, including many Ivy Bukkake - oh, sorry, I mean league - teachers.
The FED adventure was a crime syndicate experiment, and a very successful one.
Rockefeller's, JP Morgan, Rothschild's, Lazard Freres, Schoellkopf, Kuhn-Loeb, Warburgs, Lehman Brothers and Goldman Sachs salute you.
Cent'anni !
"crime syndicate experiment". Just about SAYS IT ALL.
Organized crime and banking have a long history together. Charging high interest rates was one of the first banking-related crimes. In Medieval times you would be run out of town if people found out you were charging rates comparable to todays credit cards and payday loan companies.
Organized crime REALLY took over banking though, starting in the 70s, when all the 'innovation' started.
The Fed and the Oligarchy are one and the same at this point in time.
http://psychonews.site90.net
the oligarchy that IS the international banking cartel, created the federal reserve, they did not merge, they were always there. It was modeled after the Bank of England in 1694. Brought to you by the same banking cartel that created the Central bank of Amsterdamm 1609, after they were chased out of Italy. These people have been up to these tricks long before the 70's. "innovation" just speed up the process
He can also say that he did the heroic thing to save the country from systemic total collapse.
The jury has to decide his fate. But he must be brought in front of the jury first.
It can be argued that deficit spending is the root cause. The USG doesn't have half of the courage to make bondholders take their lumps instead of taxpayers. Total credit bubble implosion would be something on the scale of a man made financial tsunami. They know it so they keep kicking the can and bleed the taxpayer dry by a thousand QE injections and FNM/FRE bailout checks. Keep the bubble inflated at ALL costs!
How is it even possible to impeach a HP printer. Next thing ya know, you guys will want to impeach a teleprompter.
Ben lied, the Dollar died.
...i wouldn't begin and end it with the failed chairman, but rather include the entire committee for you have already committed the biggest fraud mankind has ever witnessed. if you had any sense of remorse or humility, you would be the first to turn yourself in...and allow the world to live in reality...as it has been wanting such for as many years as the fraud has existed...realize what failure is...as a criminal should.
As I mentioned in a post yesterday, how do you Impeach B.B.? The Federal Reserve is not a governmental entity but a privately held corporation, of which he is the head. True he is appointed by the president and confirmed by the senate, and can be fired by Dumbo I would think but I can't see any impeachment. Now of course there are other ways of removing him as your imagination can render but impeach, I don't think so. If I'm wrong (I hope so) lets get the show on the road yesterday. Milestones
First, you find a pudgy girl for Ben to stick a cigar into. Then the Republicans will care.
Slick Willie committed perjury in a courthouse in DC
You support trying Bush for torture, I assume? Rule of law and all.
Been over 2 years now, whatch waitin' on?
Ah, team politics. What a lovely people we have become.
Bring that solid case or STFU
Bring what to whom? I'm sorry, I don't speak Idiot. Please use clear language.
I believe that the translation would be: "First, you find a pudgy girl for Ben to stick a cigar into. Then us team playing Republicans will care." Of course one must remember when interpreting Idiotese that the language makes no provision for expressing irony.
Got no case. STFU.
You refer to Bush being a torturer? Sure, I have an easy case. 1) Waterboarding is torture. 2) Bush ordered waterboarding (he directly says so in his book).
I want to see all those Republicans who lost their shit when Clinton broke the law to similarly flip out at Bush breaking the law. If not, I want Republicans, along with true-believing Democrats, to emigrate to North Korea. It is there, and only there, that their art of Team Politics will be fully appreciated and welcome.
Bush should have personally ordered to take out the freak idiot from North Korea and that fucking bonehead from Iran.
Then I'd have alot more respect for the man and you would probably have a case in your egalitarian universe of horse shit.
Life ain't fair kiddo.
I promise, pinky promise, I'm more right-wing than you.
The DPRK is at very worst a threat to the ROK. Iran is not a threat and has not nuclear weapons program.
War is a racket, kiddo. It takes from you (your money, your kin) and gives to the owners.
You want to be tough and talk about naive ideas of fair? Fight the man with a hand in your pocket or just admit you're powerless like the rest of us. That's the unfairness. You're presented with fake villains so you don't notice the real ones. Then you're led to believe it's manly and level-headed to support other people blowing up people you've never met and who have no argument with you.
Yeah, Goldwater, Reagan, and Sven D. Thrift.
Ronald "deficits don't matter" Reagan = conservative. That's a hoot.
A big problem with torture is that it doesn't work. People won't tell the truth, they will tell what the torturer wants to hear.
Another big problem is that when the torturer's people get captured, it opens them up to get tortured in turn.
People that advocate torture (a) watch too much TV, (b) don't think more than one move ahead -- at most. That's why you'll find a lot of them spouting this axis of evil nonsense.
As far as I can tell Uday & Qusay Hussein never tortured an American serviceman. They reserved that special honor for those who could not defend themselves and who sought nothing from them.
"Another big problem is that when the torturer's people get captured, it opens them up to get tortured in turn."
Tell that to Danny Pearl's family.
Grow the fuck up and leave the left wing drivel at the door.
I ache for Danny Pearl's family. I had seen the clip and it brought me to a place deep down inside that I had not felt before. Few scenes have moved me as what I experienced in that moment.
I refused to watch it...I would have gone insane with hatred.
I witnessed pure evil in that moment. An indelible image burned into my psyche, an effigy accompanied with the WTC murders.
ZakuK-
I'd guess it depends on what is meant by "work". Lies? Cross check the info with questions that have known answers vs. questions that are new info. And on and on. Everyone will break. McCain said as much, I've shaken Dale Doss's hand.
No, waterboarding is not torture, it is a part of SEAL and SERE training.
- Ned
+TARP
What's more inhumane, putting some water up a bad guy's nose to save some lives, or hunting bad guys down with drones and blasting they and their closest friends into little bits, as per Obama's penchant?
And why wasn't Bush impeached for the H2O atrocities? That must baffle you and drive you ABSOLUTELY INSANE
The United States has waterboarded innocent men. The government is indifferent to guilt and innocence.
Yes. It drives me insane. I live in a lawless country run by financial/war criminals and nobody seems to care, unless it is the other team doing it.
Yes. It drives me insane. I live in a lawless country run by financial/war criminals and nobody seems to care, unless it is the other team doing it.
You can whine all you want, but were still better than any other country in the world. If not, go move away and you won't be missed believe me.
It cracks me up every time I hear someone who has no experience with waterboarding refer to it as torture. As Navy officers going through SERE in the 80's, we were all waterboarded so we would have some idea of what to expect if shot down and captured. We were placed in a simulated POW camp after evading the enemy for a week. We were slapped around, slammed against walls, threatened with guns and deprived of sleep for a few days. Waterboarding is unpleasant and frightening, but it is FAR from torture. Furthermore, it is relatively safe. There is no chance of drowning because you are placed on a slant that precludes aspiration of water and the amount of water used is minimal. I'd take waterboarding any day over getting my legs broken, having an eye pulled out, enduring repeated physical beatings or being starved to death in isolation. Of course, if a man has never been physically challenged in any way for his entire life, I can see how he might think waterboarding is torture.
Another example of American fake masculinity. To regard causing suffering as torture is the sign of a candy-ass. To express indifference to suffering is a sure-fire sign of a real man who plays football and drives a truck around the suburbs while running errands for something resembling a wife. It is not surprising that this view of masculinity prevails in America. We are among the most feminine nations on earth. We're spiteful, irrational, vengeful and prone to wild emotional swings. How can you heartlanders not go insane?
So you're saying you don't like football?
Hoss! My man.
"We're spiteful, irrational, vengeful and prone to wild emotional swings."
Hmmmm, yes, you describe yourself well.
Maybe I have been influenced a bit too much by Hollywood, but I'm with this guy.
Waterboarding does not strike me as torture. Pulling fingernails - torture. The rack - torture. Reading Krugman - torture. These are acts of intense physical pain. We seemed to have widened the definition to include acts of intense psychological "pain", but they strike me as very different things, and while I abhor the first, and doubt its overall usefulness, the second strikes me as a perfectly legitimate technique to defeat an enemy.
With all due respect (sincerely - from one vet to another), simulated, controlled water boarding when you know you really won't be killed is little more than an uncomfortable game.
Let a couple of NVA regulars strap your ass on a slanted board in the middle of the jungle and start pouring water into your lungs and then tell me about torture - after you shit all over yourself and puke at the same time you are crying and trying to pray.
Military intelligence experts experts agree that torture is non-productive. Any information gained is untrustworthy. Real actionable intelligence can be gained by properly applied interrogation techniques, but torture slams the door shut, inducing fear and mis-trust. It is also de-humanizing for the torturer.
I realize this doesn't conform to the macho-man image we get from Hollywood, or from the draft-dodging, flag-wrapped psychopaths in Dick Cheney's office who lied us into war, but it happens to be the truth.
We must decide what kind of people we are individually, and we must decide what kind of country we are collectively. Reckon there might be any association in the decisions to ignore the rules of the Geneva Convention and ignoring rules of financial regulation on Wall Street? Actions have consequences.
Right on!Torture is evil...and we should not do it, and we should try those who do for war crimes...period.
My mentor and dear friend was captured at Bataan in WW2.He was tortured, as were all his buddies.He told me everyone breaks, some spill their guts, others go insane, but everyone breaks.It is evil, and no excuse is sufficient for it.It is justly prosecuted as a war crime...and it is ineffective too.
And Cheney defended it...the bastard.
You would think the fact Cheney approved it would be enough reason to ban it forever....
Thank you.
It cracks me up every time to someone says water-boarding isn't torture especially when we use it in concert with sleep deprivation, stress positions and dietary restrictions...along with loud music and bright lights.They adjust the diet so the prisoners won't drown in their own vomit.Nice, eh?
I think everyone involved should go to prison...life sentence.
But I am just an American, not spelled with a K....what do I know.......
I just think torture is inhuman, evil and dehumanizing...and ineffective to boot.And it puts our troops at risk, in more ways than one.
I asked for law and you expressed opinion. There is a difference. This is not Facebook.
Show me the U.S. law that he broke and I'll happily sit in the jury and convict him.
Last time I checked, perjury is still a crime. But then, these things are changing rapidly these days, so it might not be.
The War Crimes Act of 1996 (18 U.S.C. ? 2441) and the federal anti-torture statute (18 U.S.C. ? 2340A), enacted in 1994.
But really this is just about a double-standard that protects those the military-industrial/financial oligarchs deem necessary to continue their fascistic ponzi raping of the sheeple. It's like football: we're the schmucks getting all riled up about which team is going to win, and don't care about getting squeezed into tiny seats and paying through the nose for crap hotdogs and shit beer to watch steroid-and-cocaine-fueled borderline-rapists beat the shit out of each other. Hey, my team won -- so I don't care about the team owners getting rich and my tax dollars subsidizing the construction of their luxury boxes. If you think this is about perjury or torture or the rule of law or "a little temporary safety" then I bet you graduated college taking the same classes as most football players.
As long as Bush (or Clinton or Obama or...) keep the game going, they're safe. They can even confess to torture in print and still retire to Texas. Start to rock the boat (Spitzer) and you get pushed out. Clinton was just moved aside to discredit the Dems and roll us into a Republican administration to tee us up for the "Rape of the '00's". I'm with svendthrift on this one... I just want the law to be the law for everyone, not something TPTB can continue to use like so much toilet paper because hey, the Conservifucks have a big game against the Libtards coming up.
Here ya go:
Title 18, United States Code, Section 1001 makes it a crime to: 1) knowingly and willfully; 2) make any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement or representation; 3) in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative or judicial branch of the United States.
how do you Impeach B.B.?
I believe that several years ago I read that the government could buy out the Fed by handing over to the bankers the amounts they originally invested back in 1913. I don't recall the figure but it was insignificant by modern standards and we've certainly given some banks and other entities amounts in excess of that original investment.
I'm not suggesting that this ever would actually happen, but does anyone else remember anything about this or is anyone familiar enough with the original act to say whether such conditions were ever placed on formation of the Fed?
As I mentioned in a post yesterday, how do you Impeach B.B.? The Federal Reserve is not a governmental entity but a privately held corporation, of which he is the head. True he is appointed by the president and confirmed by the senate, and can be fired by Dumbo I would think but I can't see any impeachment. Now of course there are other ways of removing him as your imagination can render but impeach, I don't think so. If I'm wrong (I hope so) lets get the show on the road yesterday. Milestones
That's what I thought. Obama would need to fire him, just like other appointments - end of story.
End the Fed.
Enough said?
Well what the hell are we going to do with the debt? Pay it back?
Cute.
That debt is there because corporate America has outsourced good paying jobs to the 3rd world dreck, therefore lifted China out of the crapper and when the money got tight, the corporate banking of America gave Americans more free or next to free money so they could continue to buy the shit.
On the balance sheets the profit making greedy Chinks who were all too eager to sell their low quality overpriced crap to Americans got stuffed with notes of bad debt.
If it blows up, nobody will care. Just a balance sheet adjustment. It was just another transaction like the john who paid the hooker for her service. The john got sick from the hooker and will have learned his lesson, or not. Point is, the Chinese entered into the deal full well understanding and knowing that America the proud hooker could make it sick.
Too fucking bad.
Laws are for the little guys, who's inforcing them? I am sure that entertains them.
I saw where Jon Stewart met with Timmay during his DC rally, in private for an hour.
Which one got the hand job?
John S: Oh, Timmy, I didn't expect you to be cut.
It might be worth noting that Jonathan Stuart Liebowitz, a.k.a. John Stewart, is the brother of Lawrence Leibowitz, Chief Operating Officer of the NYSE.
It might also be worth noting that John Stewart is a COMEDIAN on COMEDY CENTRAL, a cable TV network.
Lest we all forget what the guy actually does for a living.
No disrespect intended Dr.Sandi but are you a virgin? My understanding is that John Stewart’s Daily Show is watched by millions of people. I’d agree that he’s a talented, funny guy. I have read that literally millions of the +- 30 demographic get their ‘news’ principally from watching his show.
What I am saying is that a private meeting between the influential Liebowitz and Geithner, Secretary of the U.S. Treasury (as is being reported) is very suspect especially if you were to view Geithner, former head of the NY Fed, former Goldman exec a criminal as I do. That Liebowitz's brother is Chief Operating Officer of the NYSE makes this report even more alarming.
To take you a little further- Obama’s mom once worked for Geithner’s dad at the Ford Foundation. I am not speaking of coincidences here.
Did IQ's just drop 100 basis points? It's called ZOG....as in Zionist Occupation Government.
As proved here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/08/martin-erzinger-morgan-stanley-...
Dollar is up the past two days, stocks flat, gold and silver at escape velocity.........
Who knew?
:D
I want to emphasize that while the Fed is monetizing the debt, the American people are still on the hook for the debt. The Treasury likes monetization because it doesn't have to go fundraising. The Fed 'produces' an asset with zero production cost and the American taxpayers get stuck with a $600,000,000,000 bill. Talk of cutting spending or entitlements to pay the national debt should also include talk of defaulting on Treasuries held by the Federal Reserve which is presently producing nothing in exchange for the working lives of the American people. om
If we could make the case that the US Gov. has been the victim of fraud, I contend, WE DON'T OWE SHIT, BITCHES!
hahahaha.....dunno if you're playing a straight game, but that's some funny shit !!
I was LMAO when I wrote it.
I contend "we" don't...the government does.
Dear Sir,
They are funded by our taxes. They would use our collective money to pay off the fraudsters Royal Scam.
See the glory
Of the royal scam
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRjItDLnAwc
Funny, my FutureVision3000 software says a $600,000,000,000 bill will buy a vintage Yugo in the year 2020.
Good point Ms. Doc, though your FutureVision3000 may be too generous about what that will Zimbuywae(y).
:-D
Madam M,
Great song selection...and album...but the taxes collected won't even cover the tip ;-)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vcG47CpsU6c
Americans aren't on hook for the debt. It has never happened in history that people would accept the bad and illegitimate debt the country amassed.
There are 2 options for the debtor to chose from:
a) debt forgiveness
b) war
Nobody has ever managed to draw blood from a stone.
So when the Chinese are starting to cry because their debt holdings have lost 50% or more in value, you better remember what side your on.
I'm not on any side; I'm just watching populations of bipedal apes and their unfolding drama. I'll never get why people are so willing to be conditioned as a part of social systems. You'd figure that--at some point--human beings would be able to transcend all of this garbage and at least strive to be something greater, for the sake of all of us.
I guess not, though. Humans are such a disappointment.
We go around acting like we're not apes in clothes.
But ultimately we're just apes in clothes.
yeah, but we have magic underpants .
Human beings do not grow up (mature). Any adult will steal your cookie when you look the other way. An adult will fling shit at you for not being like them in all ways (the feces being insulting or otherwise unflattering verbiage). Adults will punch you in the nose to see you bleed (start a war on people who are unlucky enough to have something you want, or don't think the same way). There are no real differences between children and adults except the various and sordid ways they sublimate and socialize their terror upon others, act out their own fears, and actualize other manifestations of ego.
I too consider myself "an observer" from above, and someone who draws inferences from what I see. But your terms "transcend" and "something greater" are misguided. In fact, they are in the reverse direction from what is needed.
What is needed is for humans to simplify and return to fundamentals --- to throw off all the fictions that now guide them.
The fact is, modern humans are literally, clinically, and technically, massively insane. Most actions modern humans take are motivated by utterly absurd fictions. But apparently humans no longer question whether the abstract ideas, concepts and notions endlessly shoved into their brains by friends, parents, teachers and media personalities are valid (refer to something real), or invalid fictions (do not refer to anything real). In fact, humans are so habituated to believing utter nonsense, they tend to stare blankly when instances are pointed out to them, or else become violent in their objections (indicating a nerve was struck, but they would rather deny what is obviously real, and believe their fairy tales).
One category of importantly crucial "fictions" include [specific] "governments", "corporations" and other kinds of "organizations" like "clubs", "societies", etc. Even in fundamental law all of these are called "fictitious entities". Since "fictitious" and "entity" are a contradiction in terms (an oxymoron?), this phrase clearly identifies that these are ideas, concepts, notions and names that do not refer to anything. They are, in fact, exactly like "SantaClaus" and "ToothFairy". The words and terms exist in human minds, the ideas, concepts and notions exist in human minds, but they do not refer to entities in the real world.
The single most important action humans could take to "fix the world" is --- identify what ideas, concepts and notions they have in their brains that do not refer to real existents in the world... and then STOP treating those ideas, concepts and notions as if they do refer to anything real.
All the problems of government would vanish. All the problems of taxes would vanish. All the problems of wars would vanish. All the problems of elections would vanish. All the problems of endless fights to steal the wealth of others would vanish. All the problems of enslavement would vanish. In fact, just about all the problems of modern man would vanish.
And all that's required is to... get real - intellecutally.
Yup, humans are revolting. But they could be great if they just threw off that which doesn't exist in the first place, and simply pay attention to the reality in front of them. Or, in a soundbite written 22 years ago:
Sanity is seeing what's in front of your face, and not seeing what isn't.
It is indeed disappointing that for all our intellect and sophistication we can't shed the hard wired instinct of grow or die. Populations produce surplus with the expectation that the environment will do the limiting. Our resourcefulness has been impressive as we have spread across the globe like an invasive species. Self restraint, conservation, and equilibrium will have to be forced upon us I'm afraid.
The illegitimate debt amassed in Argentina was never purged. The people were on the hook for the debt even after the Argentinian courts found it to be illegitimate. There is a great documentary on youtube about Argentina's crisis, and the same banks are pulling the same stunts in America now.
When the debt is monetized, like now, we're on the hook alright: the tax is called "inflation".
by Milestones
on Tue, 06/15/2010 - 14:24
#415414
The Trials and Tribulations of the Federal Reserve Act of 1913
There has been, over the last several months that I have been reading ZH, issues raised concerning the Federal Reserve and The Federal Reserve Act of 1913. The almost unanimous opinion of the readers here as well as those blogs were the topic has come up such as Market Ticker, Jesse’s Café Americain, Naked Capitalism, Mish and others too numerous to mention all decry the “FED” and their propensity for large scale plundering of our economy among other peccadillos’ .
I would contend that after reviewing the circumstances of the FED, its origins and its daily operations, the FED is not only illegal and unconstitutional; that it is also void by law, and has been since its inception in 1913.
I will interject here and now, I am not an attorney. Hopefully the arguments I will lay out below will bring up the issue to be judged by what appears to be one of the most knowledgeable, well-educated and outspoken group on the web. I post below for your consideration, comments and rebuttal.
The Federal Reserve Act was passed by Congress in the last days of December by a handful of Senators who had not left for Christmas break. The House had passed the bill earlier. President Wilson then signed it into law.
The concerns of those who oppose the FED generally center on Article I Section 8 (5) (18).That particular part of the U.S. Constitution reads in part: Article I Section 8 (5) says (Section 8)” Powers of Congress. The Congress shall have power: (5) To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin—“.
Herein lay my problem and question. The Constitution says “Congress shall have power—to regulate the value thereof.” That is what the Constitution says. Congress shall have the power to do. Oh, -I forgot, Congress apparently delegated that authority to the new kid on the block; the Federal Reserve Bank; A PRIVATELY owned bank-not a Governmental Bank!!
That delegation of power to the FED is my question. Did Congress have the authority to do so under the U.S. Constitution? So let us go to rulings by the Supreme Court to see what they had to say about this issue of delegation of authority.
Panama Refining Co. v Ryan 293 U.S. 388 1935
“The Constitution provides that 'All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.' Article 1, 1. And the Congress is empowered “To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution' its general powers.” Article 1, 8, par. 18. The Congress manifestly is not permitted to abdicate or to transfer to others the essential legislative functions with which it is thus vested. Undoubtedly legislation must often be adapted to complex conditions involving a host of details with which the national Legislature cannot deal directly. The Constitution has never been regarded as denying to the Congress the necessary resources of flexibility and practicality, which will enable it to perform its function in laying down policies and establishing standards, while leaving to selected instrumentalities the making of subordinate rules within prescribed limits and the determination of facts to which the policy as declared by the Legislature is to apply. Without capacity to give authorizations of that sort we should have the anomaly of a legislative power which in many circumstances calling for its exertion would be but a futility. But the constant recognition of the necessity and validity of such provisions and the wide range of administrative authority which has been developed by means of them cannot be allowed to obscure the limitations of the authority to delegate, if our constitutional system is to be maintained.”
The Court observed that 'it was impracticable for Congress to provide general regulations for these various and varying details of management,' and that, in authorizing the Secretary of Agriculture to meet local conditions, Congress 'was merely conferring administrative functions upon an agent, and not delegating to him legislative power.'
Thus, in every case in which the question has been raised, the Court has recognized that there are limits of delegation which there is no constitutional authority to transcend. We think that section 9(c) goes beyond those limits. As to the transportation of oil production in excess of state permission, the Congress has declared no policy, has established no standard, has laid down no rule. There is no requirement, no definition of circumstances and conditions in which the transportation is to be allowed or prohibited.
If section 9(c) were held valid, it would be idle to pretend that anything would be left of limitations upon the power of the Congress to delegate its lawmaking function. The reasoning of the many decisions we have reviewed would be made vacuous and their distinctions nugatory. Instead of performing its lawmaking function, the Congress could at will and as to such subjects as it chooses transfer that function to the President or other officer or to an administrative body. The question is not of the intrinsic importance of the particular statute before us, but of the constitutional processes of legislation which are an essential part of our system of government
FIELD V CLARK 143 US 649 1892
“That congress cannot delegate legislative power to the president is a principle universally recognized as vital to the integrity and maintenance of the system of government ordained by the constitution.
: 'The legislature cannot delegate its power to make a law, but it can make a law to delegate a power to determine some fact or state of things upon which the law makes, or intends to make, its own action depend. To deny this would be to stop the wheels of government. There are many things upon which wise and useful legislation must depend which cannot be known to the law-making power, and must therefore be a subject of inquiry and determination outside of the halls of legislation.'
That no part of this legislative power can be delegated by congress to any other department of the government, executive or judicial, is an axiom in constitutional law, and is universally recognized as a principle essential to the integrity and maintenance of the system of government ordained by the constitution. The legislative power must remain in the organ where it is lodged by that instrument.”
Well now, it appears by the language of the above two cited Supreme Court decisions, i.e.: Panama of 1935 and Field of 1892, the Federal Reserve Act is bracketed by 2 separate decisions by the Supremes; one prior to the Fed act of 1913 and one after; that the court has said that Congress does not have the authority to delegate the power “to regulate the value thereof” as that power is directly mentioned in the Federal Constitution as being granted to Congress.
Please bear with me. Sovereignty is granted to “We the people” as outlined in the first 3 words of the Preamble. As such, under the Constitution, we delegate our sovereign authority to persons to represent us in dealing with the events that govern us from day to day. But it is the reserve of the sovereign’s to delegate authority, not Congress; they only represent us; but it does not carry with it the authority to yet further delegate congressional power-that is our power as sovereigns to bind this nation in such a manner.
John Locke came to the same conclusion: (Parliament, Congress)—“Cannot transfer power of making laws to any other hands for it is being but a delegated power from the people who have it and cannot pass it over to others.”
I would contend that the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 is illegal under the Constitution. Further if we consider Marbury v Madison of 1803, a decision which to my knowledge has never been legally overturned, states the case in even far starker terms:
Marbury v Madison 17 Wall 205 Cranch 2 1803
“Thus the particular phraseology of the Constitution of the United States confirms and strengthens the principal, supposedly to be essential to all written constitutions, that a law repugnant to the constitution is void; and the courts, as well as other departments, are bound by that instrument.” Marbury v Madison 17 Wall 205 Cranch 1,2,3,4, Book 2
So now, if we followthe train to the end of the line, not only does the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 appear to be unconstitutional due to Congress’s illegal delegation of power concerning “The regulating the value thereof” part of Art. 1 Section 5 and 18; one is drawn to the conclusion that the Federal Reserve Act is void under Marbury. Congress acted illegally and contrary to the constitution by delegating its authority but President Wilson also acted illegally in signing said act into law.—“as well as other departments are bound by that instrument.”
: Black’s Law Dictionary
Manifest—Evident to the senses, especially to the sight, obvious to the understanding, evident to the mind, not obscure or hidden, and is synonymous with open, clear, visible, unmistakable, indubitable, indisputable, evident and self evident. In evidence, that which is clear and needs no proof; that which is notorious.
Void—Null; ineffectual; nugatory; having no legal force or binding effect; unable in law, to support the purpose for which it was intended. An instrument or transaction which is wholly ineffective, inoperative and incapable of ratification and which thus has no force or effect so that nothing can cure it.
In short, I contend Congress was and is prohibited by the Constitution from delegating any of its authority that is vested to it in the Constitution as shown in the 2 cases cited,i.e. Panama and Field and that that action was repugnant to that instrument and is Void under Marbury. There are undoubtly many, many laws that are currently on the books that would fall into this category.
Because the Supremes have already addressed such acts as outlined above, I question how they could rule against what they have already done. I would think the government could simply fire up the presses, make changes to the currency as did JFK in 1962 when he used red ink on $5 bills and simply deal out the Fed. (This contemplates of course eliminating Tiny Tim and BB).
I am well aware this sounds rather simplistic, but if the FED is seized lock, stock and barrel and folded into the Treasury there will of course issues to be resolved but I really can’t see them as being life threatening. Congress could try and reinstate the Act but would almost certainly face 1890’s wild west justice rapidly; like while they are all still in D.isneyland C.entral.
I am not so naiveté as to believe TPTB are going to roll over if my argument is correct. It will be ignored, and laughed at later if ignoring it fails. But Joe Sixpack is growing more and more aware that somehow the FED is the central problem in the financial mess this country finds itself. The connection must be made in the public mind that this 1920’s Al Capone Chicago style Mafia lives again posing as upstanding bankers who are in fact monstrous crooks who are in direct violation, not of the law, but of the U.S. CONSTITUTION and the banking industry are not just “greedy” people but a Mafia criminal element threatening this nation and its well being. A proper coat of paint would go a long way to identify to the general public who and what these criminals are about.
And now the caveats: this is my first post. This issue has been sticking in my craw for some time now and ZH appears to be the best forum to outline my thoughts. It’s not the only one. Corporations as people, which Thom Hartmann has gone over in his book, Unequal Protection, is another saddle on the American public that has bothered me for some time. I hope to address that issue sometime in the near future.
Further I am not an attorney as mentioned earlier and I do not know how to use the internet to Shepardize the 2 mentioned cases. I know there are attorneys on this site and any comments, critiques or help on this would be greatly appreciated.
Getting bent over a barrel is never fun but that’s how the game has to be played if you want to know if you have something or you’re as full of shit as a Christmas goose. Let the games begin.
Regards, Milestones
It's that damned Woody Wilson again. Just like Obama he never held a "real" job. President of Princeton? Ha! The Westminster Dog Show judges are more respectable.
First...I don't practice that dismal science either (law) and I never have.
But it seems to me, as the Constitution had to be ratified by the states before coming into force, that the act of creating the Federal Reserve (by it, the federal government) was not within the powers enumerated (granted) to the federal government (therefore Congress) by the individual states.
In other words...the individual states that make up the nation never voted for a Federal Reserve or ever concieved of there being one because they placed that authority with Congress only.
http://www.constitution.org/constit_.htm#con1.8.5
It was done without state ratification, which would be the proper course for a power specifically given to Congress (the regulation of weights, measures...money).
I believe you are correct.
Thank you.
what about all the other lies?
this serves as an additional basis for full fed audit
Even Tonto have something to say. Carpetbagger say you to can have profitable Q. Me show you How. How! no not that how. Your company no make money, you buy MBS 10 to 30 cent of dollar. Mark to Market rule, you show full value on books. Your stock go up. You by my elixir now. 2 for 10 dollar.
Nothing goi'n to happen.. Too many high profiles would have to go down with the ship.. They will ride this horse into the ground...
Yes you are right. There is one small thing I have noticed just in the last 2 days. I may be delusional, but it seems that a small percentage of the Dancing w/the stars crowd have woken up. If so, and as we know they are chatter boxes, something could spread very fast. In this, the public drones could be learned very quickly. It could happen. I was randomly speaking to 2 black women - and what they told me was amazing. They are conservatives and do not even know it. Both out of work and fighting to survive - Have skills but too much competition in a jobless refuckury.
Outside of talking my own book, I am not 100% sure he is choosing the worst path here. It is a giant crap sandwich either way.
So your bet is that the fan is of the Japanese type and not electric?
You can still get a wicked bounce off a hand fan. Less splatter though.
My guess is that Bernanke is firing into the front of an electric fan instead of from behind. This is, after all, the man that dithered all thru 2007 and half of 2008.