Fed Must Disclose Bank Bailout Records As Court Of Appeals Upholds Historic "Mark Pittman" Decision

Tyler Durden's picture

Next step for the Fed weasels - petitioning the Supreme Court in an attempt to completely trample America's constitution. In the meantime, Mark Pittman smiles from above as Satan reevaluates the amend and extend provisions of his affirmative covenants with the Fed.

From Bloomberg:

March 19 (Bloomberg) -- The Federal Reserve must disclose
documents identifying financial firms that might have collapsed
without the largest ever U.S. government bailout, a federal
appeals court said.

The U.S. Court of Appeals in Manhattan ruled today that the
Fed must release records of the unprecedented $2 trillion U.S.
loan program launched primarily after the 2008 collapse of
Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. The ruling upholds a decision of a
lower-court judge, who in August ordered that the information be

The opinion might not be the final word in the bid for the
documents, which was launched by Bloomberg LP, the parent of
Bloomberg News, with a November 2008 lawsuit. The Fed could seek
a rehearing or appeal to the full appeals court and eventually
petition the U.S. Supreme Court.

The court was asked to decide whether loan records are
covered by the U.S. Freedom of Information Act, or FOIA.
Historically, the type of government documents sought in the
case has been protected from public disclosure because they
might reveal competitive trade secrets. The Board of Governors
of the Federal Reserve System had argued that disclosure of the
documents threatens to stigmatize lenders and cause them
“severe and irreparable competitive injury.”

Financial Crisis

Bloomberg, majority-owned by New York Mayor Michael
, sued after the Fed refused to name the firms it lent
to or disclose loan amounts or assets used as collateral under
its lending programs. Most of the loans were made in response to
the deepest financial crisis since the Great Depression.

Lawyers for Bloomberg argued in court that the public has
the right to know basic information about the “unprecedented
and highly controversial use” of public money.

“Bloomberg has been trying for almost two years to break
down a brick wall of secrecy in order to vindicate the public’s
right to learn basic information,” Thomas Golden, an attorney
for the company with Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP, wrote in
court filings.

Banks and the Fed warned that bailed-out lenders may be
hurt if the documents are made public, causing a run or a sell-
off by investors. Disclosure may hamstring the Fed’s ability to
deal with another crisis, they also argued.

Potential Harm

Much of the debate at the appeals court argument on Jan. 11
centered on the potential harm to banks if it was revealed that
they borrowed from the Fed’s so-called discount window. Matthew
, a lawyer for the government, said banks don’t do that
unless they have liquidity problems.

FOIA requires federal agencies to make government documents
available to the press and public. An exception to the statute
protects trade secrets and privileged or confidential financial
data. In her Aug. 24 ruling, U.S. District Judge Loretta Preska
in New York said the exception didn’t apply because there’s no
proof banks would suffer.

The Fed’s balance sheet debt doubled after lending
standards were relaxed following Lehman’s failure on Sept. 15,
2008. That year, the Fed began extending credit directly to
companies that weren’t banks for the first time since the 1930s.
Total central bank lending exceeded $2 trillion for the first
time on Nov. 6, 2008, reaching $2.14 trillion on Sept. 23, 2009.

Payment Processors

The Clearing House Association, which processes payments
among banks, joined the case and sided with the Fed. The group
includes ABN Amro Bank NV, a unit of Royal Bank of Scotland Plc,
Bank of America Corp., The Bank of New York Mellon Corp.,
Citigroup Inc., Deutsche Bank AG, HSBC Holdings Plc, JPMorgan
Chase & Co
., US Bancorp and Wells Fargo & Co.

More than a dozen other groups or companies filed friend-
of-the-court briefs. Those arguing for disclosure of the records
included the American Society of News Editors and individual
news organizations.

The case is Bloomberg LP v. Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System, 09-04083, U.S. Court of Appeals for the
Second Circuit (New York).

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
casino capitalism's picture

No way will the Supreme Court rule against the Fed.  That's a certainty.

Ripped Chunk's picture

Seems like the lower courts have more integrity than the Supreme Court lately.


Cognitive Dissonance's picture

Alas, the Supreme Court has always sustained the financial elite and the PONZI. That was, and is, the purpose of the court, to maintain the status quo which has always been in favor of the financial elite. Yes I'm aware of what the history (myth) books say was/is the "original" purpose of the Court but I've grown up since grade school and I've removed my "dunce" indoctrination cap and have begun to think for myself.

Oh sure, there are ebb and flows, back and forth, for and against the working slave ....er...man. But from the big picture point of view, the Supreme Court has always been beneficial to those who have the money and those who control the puppet strings. The Court has always supported the consumer plantation, just like it supported slave ownership, monopolies and every other form of centralized power structure.

Ripped Chunk's picture

Roberts showed the hand a bit at the SOU. He would have been better off sitting there stone faced so as not to give the poor innocent fools who still believe in the "sanctity" of the court any reason to doubt.


But he's too @%#$#^#&^^# arrogant.

SV's picture

The Supreme Court has also had it's share of prodding lately by a non-friendly (Hostile) administration.  Roberts may bite that hand after all...

Cognitive Dissonance's picture

I agree there are occasional "surprises" from the Court. But in the big scheme of things, they're minor and change little from the prospective of who has the money and who doesn't. And who never will.

Every supposedly independent political entity must put on a show of independence now and then to maintain the illusion. I lost all faith in the Supreme Court with the Bush Florida ballot decision, when I finally realized that despite what everyone tells me, the Court is as political as any other branch of government. 

I'm not talking about the decision they made. They should never had made a decision to begin with. They should have sent it back to Florida unheard. It was a states rights issue and they trampled on it. Suddenly I understood how the slave owning southerners felt when the Federal government came in and told the states what to do.

I'm not saying I believe in slaves. I believe in states rights. The constitution, as flawed as it was, gave each state the right to determine if it wanted to own slaves. There is a remedy for the Constitution if changes are to be made. It's called amendments or another constitutional congress to make changes. War is not one of the options in the constitution for the Federal government to impose changes. I always thought it was the "United States of America", not the "Federal Government Composed of 50 States".

I know this statement will appear to be simplistic and I can't expand on it in this space. But the civil war was simply a power grab by the Federal government disguised as "freedom" for the slaves. Why is it every time the Federal government talks about defending my freedom, some of my freedom is taken away?

Just askin'!

Conrad Murray's picture

I always thought it was the "United States of America", not the "Federal Government Composed of 50 States".

You obviously weren't taught to think in public school.  Federalist/Anti-Federalist?  That doesn't matter you poor old relic.  Don't you know gays are trying to get married!?!

Cognitive Dissonance's picture

"You obviously weren't taught to think in public school.  Federalist/Anti-Federalist?" 

I'm assuming your taking the same medications you prescribed to Michael Jackson and that's what prompted this outburst. And your homophobic outburst can be ascribed to what?

If this is all sarcasm, the <sarcasm> affirmation would be appreciated until you have a little more than the 4 days of ZH experience you currently posses. This is your second post, right? What a way to make an entrance.

Conrad Murray's picture

Homophobic?  Let us not fall back to the use of such ridiculous terms.  I have nary a fear of queer, rest assured.

Allow me to make an offering of humor and insight - http://www.comedycentral.com/videos/index.jhtml?title=black-bush&videoId...


WaterWings's picture

Since the topic has been knocked out of orbit I'll point out this story I found on HuffPo after doing a search for the Baier-Obama interview...with almost 23,000 comments! I think I found Marla, whipping the money-changers over there!


If Obamacare passes, we have one full step closer to civil war - and if it doesn't we have a clearly lame-duck prez at the beginning of his second year, just before the second civil war. Epic!

Cognitive Dissonance's picture

I didn't get past 50 of the 22,770 listed comments before I gave up in disgust. These people simply don't wish to get past the left-right, Republican-Democrat, my dictator - your dictator is correct insanity that keeps the plebs busy in the front parlor while the good silver is being looted from the dinning room hutch. 

Even when I come across an open mind on HuffPost, s/he is buried under an avalanche of finger pointing and hate/fear mongering. From my point of view, there is little to be gained from attempting to engage with the lowest common denominator mentality. The entire purpose of both left and right blogs such as these is one of distraction, not problem solving. As George Washington wrote about a few weeks back on ZH, the web is being used as a place where frustrations are being vented, bleeding off steam that otherwise might be used more constructively/destructively.

Since the pen (the Internet "space") is so vast and involved, the cattle/sheep/disenfranchised can be easily led to believe that something is getting done because of all the energy being expended when in fact nothing is getting done, other than the fact that otherwise perfectly good energy and emotional output is being spilled on the sheets. This is all part of the control system.

WaterWings's picture

my dictator - your dictator is correct insanity that keeps the plebs busy in the front parlor while the good silver is being looted from the dinning room hutch.


Hmm. Makes absolute sense. The internet as a distraction and keeping "otherwise perfectly good energy and emotional output [from exploding out in the streets].

Your description above frames that comment section perfectly.


Cognitive Dissonance's picture


Thank you for finishing my thought with your words in parentheses.

"Since the pen (the Internet "space") is so vast and involved, the cattle/sheep/disenfranchised can be easily led to believe that something is getting done because of all the energy being expended when in fact nothing is getting done, other than the fact that otherwise perfectly good energy and emotional output is being spilled on the sheets instead of exploding in the streets. This is all part of the control system."

That's a keeper. Thank you co-author.

Bob's picture

The web certainly is a paradox.  All the intellectual freedom and communication . . . but shared among a vast community who tend to live their lives from their front row seats at the cyber looking glass.  Another opiate of the people?

Howard_Beale's picture

Same content appreciated as WW. Priceless CD.

merehuman's picture

like gold ,us old relics have value and some have wisdom. Without old relics you would not be alive today , young fool.

merehuman's picture

someone  was putting down old people, i responded to a post that is no longer here. wish i could remove mine but the edit feature is gone.

Ripped Chunk's picture

The US Civil War was about much more than slavery. The abolishment of slavery was a very important result of the war. And it was the topic used to get the general public on board to a large degree. 

The Civil War was about money, wealth and control of the US' banking system and raw materials. It always comes down to the Bankers.  The master manipulators. Getting what they want.

Jackson was oppsed to a central bank - spuff, the gun mis-fired (twice)

Lincoln was opposed to a central bank - bang!



etc. etc.



Cognitive Dissonance's picture

I agree. Like I said, it was a simplistic statement. Anytime the words Federal government are used, it should be understood that it is a puppet regime.

The "Federal government" has always been the front man for those who wish to exercise control and gain money and power. Why even try to do anything on your own when you have a puppet regime you can control. That makes all the thieving and corruption legal, right?

The history books have been so sanitized (I've always been fascinated that sanity is a derivative [2nd, 3rd?]of sanitized or sanitation) that very few people understand what's going on today is a very old program updated and expanded for the exponential potential that comes with the computer age, supported by  predictive programming techniques on TV and the resulting group think hive mentality.

The age of corruption, HFT style.

merehuman's picture

Thank you CD . Pirates is what they are. Perhaps if the public could see them in a new light, it would open a few eyes

35Pete's picture


1. All civil societies/cultures develop Elites; this is the nature of social animals. Elites are self organizing groups which share the same self-interests, that is, a higher-order clique; they are not conspiracies or formal organizations.

2. Under certain conditions, the structural obstacles/negative feedbacks which constrain Elite dominance weaken and the Elites (private and public/State), like any other human group, seek to exploit the resulting windfall.

3. This leads the Elites to over-reach which creates positive feedback: the more wealth and influence the Elites/State control, the easier it becomes to control even more. The net result is the Elites and the State's share of the national income rises to historic extremes.

4. Regardless of the exact nature of over-reach--expansionist warfare or financial leverage and looting are two popular choices--the interests of the Elites and the society as a whole diverge. As this divergence grows, the social contract between the Elites and those whose productivity powers the economy and society begins fraying.

5. Over-reach ontologically (inherently) leads to structural imbalances which then threaten to destabilize the productive middle class which supports the Elites. Due to the overwhelming power of the Elites/State partnership's fiefdoms, structural reform is impossible (see Chapter Twenty below).

6. As the productive middle class's share of national income shrinks, a well-concealed,opaque parallel system of dominance with a structure of its own arises to exclusively serve the interests of the Plutocracy/State Elites (apparatchiks). The hidden mechanisms are many: backroom deals, unwritten "understandings," price-fixing and other forms of collusion; cash payments and other "gifts and donations;" political favoritism (special admission to elite public universities for the well-connected); and a cornucopia of financial benefits: access to initial public offerings, special tax laws written to reward a particular enterprise or cartel, and so on.

7. The State, which was intended as a bulwark against the natural dominance of concentrated private capital and Monarchy, has instead become the handmaiden of the rentierfinancial Power Elites. The Elites and the State have thus become partners in the task of diverting ever-larger shares of the national income to their own coffers.

8. As a result, inequality--as measured by shares of the national income and wealth--widens, furthering the divergence of interests between the productive class and the Elites/States' unproductive fiefdoms and dependents.

9. The State/Elites seek to counter these growing imbalances by extracting more from the productive class via taxes and "theft by other means" and masking this rising inequality by manipulating the politics of experience via relentless mass media propaganda. The goal is four-fold: nurture complacency and fatalism in the citizenry; divert their attention from the concealed parallel system that benefits the Plutocracy and State Elites exclusively; legitimize simulacrum democracy and delegitimize protest.

10. To keep the State dependents passive and unthreatening, the Elites/State placate this class with "bread and circuses," State-funded entitlements paid for by raising taxes on the dwindling productive class. Under the guise of entitlements, the State (and the Elites who control it) has in effect bought the passive complicity of its dependents in the Elites' growing dominance of national income and wealth.

11. Having over-promised entitlements to the unproductive and garnered the majority of national income and wealth for themselves, the Plutocracy/State Elites can only tax the productive class so much lest they kill the horse they ride so majestically. Their only alternative to loss of income and power is to debauch the currency by printing money and debauch credit by borrowing far in excess of what can possibly be paid back.

12. The debauchery of credit and currency and rising inequality/diverting of national income to the Elites continues in a process of devolution until a phase shift/tipping point is reached and the status quo collapses in insolvency.



swamp's picture

No, that's not the intended purpose of the Supreme Court. Never was. I'll agree it has become corrupted, but to state that was the intent of the founders is just plain wrong.

reply to:

That was, and is, the purpose of the court, to maintain the status quo

Cognitive Dissonance's picture


OK, so what was the intent of the Supreme Court, other than a stop on unfettered power exercised by either the executive or legislative (or judicial) branches? Or was that it? Or something else? The Court has made serious errors many times in the past, even before the civil war, and it appears it was often due to political pressure or self interests among key judges.

I'm not being sarcastic. I'm always ready to learn from a reasoned argument and I'm often wrong in my views. Would you consider replying so I can understand your thinking?

merehuman's picture

USSC is not on our side. Eminent Domain, corporations as people, and a stolen election are testament to that.

Not For Reuse's picture


fertile for ruminating intent. apologies for brevity,

35Pete's picture

STOTUS is especially dangerous if compromised because they have the special power of giving legitimacy to unconstitutional law and decisions. 

The sheeple don't see this and often point to STOTUS' decisions as "proof" that something is constitutional when it's not. 

Ohh, not a typo. STOTUS = Supreme Tools of The United States (power elite establishment)

Conrad Murray's picture

Ahhh, my business will be booming once people realize they are merely new world serfs.

chet's picture

Roberts and crew will make this all go away.  We're starting to get an inkling of what's happened to the Court.  But a few more rulings and it will be undeniable.

merehuman's picture

A few more rulings....

You mean you need MORE proof?

This brings up a conversation i had with my lady last night.

The question i asked her is "at what point will you rebel, say no to the government? How bad does it have to get? will you wait till they come to your house? Will you allow them to draft your children into an army?

Will you help them spy and turn in your neighbor if they ask or demand?

Will you rebel, say no more?

Will you wait until all jobs and all hope is gone

Where do we draw the line?

Foolish or not, tho i go forward with trepidation next week saturday is my day to begin the long 3,000 mile drive . I would already be on the way cept after weeks of no work i have a 6 day job putting a spec house together.

So she says to me, " What if some more work comes in?"

If it does it does. I could go on working and let them fool me some more.

Mind i am leaving a safe secure sitiuation for the unknown. But if you want to eat chicken , you have to kill the damn thing. You gotta chop wood for the fire and you gotta stand up to criminals and for your self respect. When i leave the planet i expect to take nothing more or less than my integrety.

I do not want or expect anything from anybody except honesty.

This is not a donation drive , but i do hope i inspire others to stand up for what they believe in and know what it is they believe.

delacroix's picture

merehuman, you can do more good, closer to home, help others to prepare, for what cannot be reversed at this late stage, with protests in washington. expend your limited resources wisely. good luck either way.

merehuman's picture

delacroix, thank you and i hear you. If it falls apart before i get gone i will stay home. But it seems our people are befuddled, isolated, in shock and persuaded that all is well or getting better. Makes it right hard to sit on my butt. I recall part of a passage....."as good men stood by". That remains with me as much as the awareness that life is indeed illusion . None the less as long as i have this body i must stand and be counted to honor myself.

To allow someone to continiou to steal from me and mine? No way.

35Pete's picture


Honor is a gift that you give to yourself, and the one thing that only you can give away. 

DaveyJones's picture

"stigmatize lenders" cause... it might reveal just how corrupt and crumbling the house of cards stand. The sad thing is, the Supremes will finally feed that bullshit right back to us for that very reason. I'm with CC and CD, as things gets more desperate, the three branches will continue to coalesce for criminal coverage and survival until....well, the revolution

Phazer2's picture

The courts are just dangling a carrot for us peasants . . .

TraderMark's picture

Speaking of wonderful Supreme Court decisions, the first 2 corporations have explored running for Congress.  Yes, it's not from The Onion.



  • THE effort to elect Murray Hill to Congress is a political campaign unlike any other. It is rare for an election candidate to pledge to “put people second, or even third”, instead of the habitual first, but then the aspiring representative for Maryland’s 8th District is not a person but a company.
  • According to its YouTube advert, Murray Hill, a public-relations firm, is taking advantage of a recent Supreme Court ruling that granted corporations full first-amendment political rights as people, to help create “the best democracy money can buy.
  •  Nor is it alone: according to the Washington Post, a firm called Computer Umbrella is now running for Congress in Virginia.

    Al Gorerhythm's picture

    You are not wrong there CC. The supreme court has distorted the meaning of the constitution for some time.

    Michael Rozeff spells out the root of the cancer here:-http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2010/02/18/legal-tender-laws-and-the...

    His essay shows how the government used their political appointees in the supreme court to over-rule the constitution, in their drive to institute Legal Tender Laws and thereby, big government preservation statutes.

    That should expose the MO of those who junked you.

    Sorry folks, you'll have to copy and paste this as I don't know how to offer a direct link

    merehuman's picture

    Marla, Tyler  !!!  PLEASE can you, would you change the junk set up?

    As it is now a perfectly rational, well written piece will dissappear. Perhaps its Geithner or Bumberknacky or a total idiot getting his kicks.

    But it aint worken'  as it is. Thank you in advance for any move you make on this. I love your site.

    Al Gorerhythm's picture

    Exactly MH. Junking without comment is BS. Adds nothing to the debate. Anyone who has written in anything "anti the supreme court" or of its support by smarmy politicians, has been junked by some anonymous turd who hasn't the where-with-all to hold a debate. Fuck off you troglodyte. 

    merehuman's picture

    Thanks. To whoever, thank you for the junk , i consider it a badge of honor to be considered for your disapproval. Even morons should have their day.

    I almost junked someone, i did not agree with them, but will defend their right to say it. Speak moron!

    Bob's picture


    Perhaps a pop-up window identifying the junker, who then has to send a note to admin to explain the "junking" would be appropriate. 

    There is, or should be, a big difference between "voting" in support/disagreement of/with a post (with just a mouse click) and labeling something "Junk", which should be reserved for spam, wild insanity that would discredit the community, etc..

    Hondo's picture

    The Fed is sooo stupid.  We all know that almost every bank borrowed from them and still do.  We all know the Fed is rigging the system this very minute.  We all know that at its very core the Fed is corrupt.

    nope-1004's picture

    Which is precisely why the entire lot needs to be put in prison.

    White collar crime is no longer a crime in America.

    SteveNYC's picture

    Dude, is it just me, or did you build that fantastic avatar in light of your dedicated purpose to seeing Tim Geithner behind bars at some point in future?

    Your dedication is encouraging, good on you. BUT, you forgot to add that classic line at the bottom of your post:

    "Tim Geithner needs to go to jail"


    Don't forget  it, otherwise, it's one step closer to:



    Orly's picture

    Yeah but is he really gonna do his time in Harris County Jail?

    koaj's picture

    a back door into hr1207 is fine with me

    time to burn for 100 years of slavery

    Catullus's picture

    Anyone hearing of bank problems today? Trouble getting money out? ATM transactions not going through?