This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
On The New York Fed's Editorial Influence Over The WSJ
One of last year's key pieces of financial reporting was Jon Hilsenrath's disclosure that then-Goldman Sachs and FRBNY director Stephen Friedman was in possession of Goldman Sachs shares while holding inside information that the Fed was willing to bailout Goldman et al forever and ever, even as a waiver to allow Friedman to buy was still in process with no formal outcome, and the Goldman/FRBNY director was loading up on even more shares. As the WSJ's Hilsenrath and Kate Kelly reported, "while it was weighing the request, Mr. Friedman bought 37,300 more
Goldman shares in December. They’ve since risen $1.7 million in value." Not a shabby profit for someone who knew the system would never put him at risk of having to disgorge ill-obtained profits while in a position so conflicted, even a Chrysler-addled supreme court justice would have no problem figuring out just how blatant the systemic abuse was. Sure enough, the reporting was of sufficiently high caliber that it garnered a finalist place in this year's Gerald Loeb Awards (and seeing how ARS' "Too Big To Fail" chronology-of-events-from-the-perspective-of-Wall Street won a Loeb, it tells all you all you need to know about this particular award, and we'll leave it at that). Yet going through some of the recently made public e-mails produced on behalf of Stephen Friedman, we had a few questions as to the full independence of the WSJ when it comes to "editorial" suggestions from the Federal Reserve Board Of New York. As the below email from Fed EVP of the Communications Group, ala media liaison, Calvin Mitchell to the WSJ's Kate Kelly demonstrates, and as the final product confirms, the Fed was quite instrumental in what quotes, tangents, implications, and story lines the WSJ was allowed and not allowed to use and pursue in framing the problem of not only Friedman's conflict of interest, but that of the FRBNY board of directors itself. And seeing how Kelly and Hilsenrath caved in to every FRBNY editorial demand, one wonders just what the (s)quid-pro-quo for this particular form of alleged media capture may have been.
We present FRBNY-TOWNS-R1-191200/1:
We may be a little too far removed from the traditional way media is editorialized, but last time we checked we had the impression that the "independent" media would not follow the guidelines of the Federal Reserve on what is and isn't publishable, especially in the context of a piece that could easily end up having very damning implications for Goldman, the FRBNY, a "respected" director of both entities, and the entire regulatory process that allows these kinds of conflict of interest to be waived retroactively with an ex-post facto waiver, such as the case was here.
Since Zero Hedge has little risk of ever being in the FRBNY's good graces (ha ha ha), we would like to present the very quotes that the FRBNY thought may have been a little too sensitive for public consumption.
To wit:
- On the general attitude of the NY Fed Board:
"In fact the ultimate approval for the things that get done, basically, get done by the full Fed board in Washington and our board has what I've called a blanket recusal. We might get briefed that something... problematical is happening this weekend... but we not only don't get involved in that stuff, we don't want to ratify it and we don't want to get involved in it because we don't want to have a perceived responsibility that exceeds our authority." I'D SUGGEST NOT
- On [Friedman's] involvement/awareness of what the NY Fed was doing with AIG from last September on:
"The audit committee... focuses on how the Fed staff has geared up to handle its responsibilities, and this is something they take very seriously and report on to the full board, and I have on occasion audited the sessions... That's administrative or ministerial as opposed to matter of policy." I'D SUGGEST NOT.
- On [Friedman's] feelings about the candidate to succeed Geithner and the fact that he didn't want the person's past job(s) to be a distraction:
"We were very sensitive to what organization that person had come from." I'D SUGGEST NOT
[Geithner's replacement, Bill Dudley, came over from Goldman Sachs, and was previously in charge of the Fed's notorious "Liberty 33" Markets Group, better known in other circles by various less politically correct acronyms]
It is easy to see why the Fed was staunchly against any of these "insinuations" making the final Hilsenrath/Kelly article. Yet we would like to pick up on Ms. Kelly's line of questioning, and push this formerly confidential email out to the public, to make it clear just what are the questions that the Fed would prefer to not see discussed in a broader public arena. We do also wonder, just why it is that the WSJ journalists dropped pursuing these lines of investigation upon the merest frown of disapproval by a lowly Fed clerical worker. Just how much power over "established and independent" media does the WSJ have? Also, just how much information is the Fed feeding to publications that are in its "white list" in exchange for perpetuating a cordial relationship where the media side of the equation never discusses more than is politically acceptable (also makes the Loeb committee award to Mr. Sorkin that much more understandable).
To be fair, it appears Hilsenrath did manage to get on the Fed's nerves at least once prior to the abovementioned smackdown.
This can be seen in the following email from Mitchell to FRBNY General Counsel Thomas Baxter (FRBNY-TOWNS-R1-101195):
Because heaven forbid someone should "impugn the integrity of Friedman or the Fed because of the so-called Goldman connection." We wonder just what high level talking-to resulted as a consequence of this almost-published scandal. Key word here being:almost. While absent additional email disclosure from Mr. Friedman, and his public production seems surprisingly sparse, we would be the last to challenge the WSJ reporters' professional integrity to pursue a story to its core, this kind of ultra-high level intermediation by none other than the Federal Reserve does bring up some rather uncomfortable questions.
PS. for those wishing to do some additional due diligence, we suggest a brief perusal of Bates 195712
»
- 20205 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Why go to NYFED when Rupert Murdoch owns WSJ.....WSJ is filled with propaganda these days...
He also owns Faux News. Hmmm?
I'm wondering how many of the mental midgets who use the term "Faux News" have ever watched more than 30 seconds worth of Fox News.
Fox is more likely to pickup this story than any other so called news reporters.
Guess again. Not if it casts news corps 'WSJ' in a bad light.
Mental midgets? Anyone who thinks Faux News is anything but the personal mouthpiece of Rupert Murdoch and his Kleptocratic cohorts is beyond stupid. The same for anyone who believes the corporate media in the US always acts in the best interest of the American public. You probably believe we are in Iraq and Afgahnistan to spread Democracy. That kind of stupid cannot be fixed.
"Fox is more likely to pickup this story than any other so called news reporters."
NOT!
More likely (in order of likelihood)
1. Comedy Central
2. Bloomberg
3. PBS
Or Rolling Stone or the NY Post.
this, and homer below, remind me of the harvard study of the use of the word "torture" to describe waterboarding as reported at the nyt and the washpo ("liberal" according to the benighted sector of the right). for decades the practice was "torture" (when other nations did it). as soon as the bush administration said we're doing it and it's not torture, the language changed to "harsh interrogation practices used since 9-11" or some such newspeak. partisan politics is used to confuse and divide.
Jeff - It's just a dunk in the water according to deficits don't matter Dick Cheney and the aforementioned "news" organizations.. Most especially the Wall Street Urinal.
>Fox is more likely to pickup this story than any other so called news reporters.
Of course it is, dear. And I have a 14 inch cock.
Why is it you libbies call Fox News "Faux News" when all CNN/NBC/MTV/Comedy Central/(insert leftist news station here) does is just have a bunch of libbie blowhards constantly discuss news from a leftist point of view?
Lefty...Righty.
If it feels comfortable, let it fall where it may.
Please feel free to come up with derogatory/playful monikers for these as well. MSNBS/NBS/CNBS seems to be the term of choice for the peacock-logoed broadcasting phenomena here on ZH.
I think the broader point is that ALL mainstream outlets, be they left/right/"independent" are hopelessly beholden to and captured by the very entities/interests they are supposed to report on - at least to a certain extent. There are (generally individual journalist) exceptions, and there are degrees of capture (perhaps?), but the spin is ever-present. Fox is perhaps more obviously agenda-centric, but that may be a personal taste coupled with lack of exposure -- I only watch a few clips online here and there, my TV is strictly for DVD/VHS.
Frankly, I enjoy the BBC, CD. And they are more likely than anyone to pick up this story, but who cares?
This is not directed at you CD--this is for you newbies. Stop infighting like a bunch of kindergardeners with the lefty/righty/junking nonsense. Don't you get it? That's the illusion, the plan, the way to keep you under control. Once you accept that there is no left or right--only control--you will truly get off the FC porch.
You are captured if you are wasting your brain cells thinking about who will pick up the story, etc. Use what is left of your captured brain to think deeply about what is happening and the context of the post. If you don't, then TPTB have you right where they want you so you won't see the bigger picture. Divide and conquer. Perhaps Cognitive Dissonance will address this issue.
AMAZING WORK TYLER, et al. THANK YOU.
The story is what is important here. This is outfuckingstanding journalism.
+10
A little too sanctimonious for a positive rating.
Well, shit. If I had known Comedy Central was THEEE place to get my daily data in the form of comedy over information... daaaaaaamn.. thanks guys!! /end sarcasm
[edit]
http://biggovernment.com/jpollak/2010/06/28/shorebank-the-11th-hour-cover-up/
Heh heh. "Problematical."
i junked you by accident trying to click on your link. sorry.
If you click it again he will be "un-junked"
No offense, but I was amused by the fact that someone junked your how-to-un-junk post. It's almost like getting a gold medallion with a picture of you with a gold medallion.
On the topic of Fox News, please give my opinion the respect and authority that it deserves. Fox News is like a bad-ass Camaro with flames stenciled on the side - you can't fuck with that sort of power. It cuts through, clarifies, takes no shit and separates the men from boys, like a Z28 ripping up the track. Damn, I've got goose bumps just talking about that shit.
The only news I watch is Fox News. I'm a Christian conservative red neck, who doesn't want his news filtered through the liberal, homosexual, socialist agendas that one finds on NBC, CNN, and NPR. If Fox News is a Camaro, those other stations are nothing but bitch-ass tricks, driving Civics with rainbow stickers on the back.
I've been listening to the giants like Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity for the past two years, which in turn, has opened my eyes to the corruption that runs rampant throughout the Democratic party. Graph after graph after graph on Beck's chalk-board has proven that Obama is a pagan, racist terrorist, who panders to the illegals and homosexuals (the only ones dumb enough to vote for him). Obama has a socialist, grand plan to transform this country into a Mars-like colony where everyone is a homosexual, everyone is named Jose and everyone has insurance. Try changing my name to Jose when you've got a shotgun pointed at your face, bitch!
Obviously, I'm probably one of the smartest and most cultured (I wear Brut after-shave) posters on this forum, and I exclusively rely on Fox News for my opinions. I don't know much about economics or that faggot named Keynes, but I know a lot about God, guns and various groups of people who aren't welcome in my backyard.
That being said, Fox News fits my agenda.
And another thing, if this country had a Republican in the White House, we'd never be in this mess.
Palin/Jesus 2012
If you people would spend half the time digging through the treasure trove of documents that Tyler hath provided linked goodness to instead of hurling insults at each other, we might all come together and teach the world to sing. Now git to work dammit!
>>>CLICK HERE<<<
good places to start: 194933 and 195712
Far be it from me to shirk homework, but the structure is laid out by member names, and the gentlemen mentioned in the quoted emails are NOT in their respective folders. Could you mention keywords/names?
This was way over my head to start with, but R1-21553 (contained in folder for Sarah D.) is a printed version of a spreadsheet that seems to list a lot of AIG deals (CDS, TRS, 2a7) by counterparty, with the following details:
Position Number, Deal Name, Counterparty, Currency, Type, MS/Arb/RegCap/Other, Collateral Type, Current Balance, Date of call, Counterparty Call Amount (redacted in all but a few cases), Sept 20 AIG marks, Blackrock stress price (or average), Dollar loss with additional above points, Loss on termination, Incremental exposure if AIG is downgraded to BBB+, ATE Below X rating, Rating based ATE, .
Whoever archived it did not have a lot of experience with printing Excel, did not have time or possibly did not mind creating a jigsaw puzzle for whoever was looking at it.
I was looking through some emails and buried in one, there are tables of the Maiden Lane III Purchase Price Schedule that take up 16 pages or so. There are approximately 40 distinct CUSIP numbers on each page. So out of the 500 or so CUSIP numbers, why is 4371 ODAD4 the only one that has it's associated data redacted?
Also, an interesting email exchange in which the french dude from SocGen is willing to hop on a plane and fly to NY on the weekend in order to sign. Gee ya think?
Lots of wading but you can find that stuff here: http://documents.republicans.oversight.house.gov/SIGTARP-production/
then third sub directory: FRBNY production to S+
then : emails and attachments part 2 of 5.pdf
page 138 for the schedules
page 88 for the French connection
There might be a reason tyler told you to LOOK at those specfic emails.
See what is contained therein.
Tyler tells me to do stuff but I ignore him. I'm too busy listening to my neighbors' labrador retreiver.
[sigh] I cannot bring myself to take advantage of the opportunity presented here, but whoever does, RECORD IT plz.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFSUtNEF6_U
Hilarious. A Brooksley Born soundboard should drive Viniar batshit crazy. You were right, the other number was for Turbo, not Friedman (bad doggy). I wish I had all the numbers in Turbo's phone logs. Could sell them to a DC Madam and retire in style (no offense to you Spitzer).
LOL ... TD you won't believe this but my neighbors' labrador retriever just whispered Vinier's home ph number in my ear. Then the son of a bitch gave me Friedmans number too!
- High Five
Are you sure it wasn't Timmay's? BTW, you may want to keep hanging out with that retriever, it may have friends around the block who know... friends of the above fine gents.
Check your e-mails from Jul 3.
≠
I fought with my twin, that enemy within
’Til both of us fell by the way
Horseplay and disease is killing me by degrees
While the law looks the other way
b. dylan - II
this stays, maybe can help someone else be spared.
Well Palin/Jesus have my vote.
IF and ONLY if Jesus shows to debate biden. Then i am on board.
btw, aren't you Canadian eh?
and you work in southern Cal and live in a mobile estate.. right? At least there can be no question as to where you garner your dollars...
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2010/06/welfare-cash-dispensed-at-...
Well done.
Still slopping the gerber eh homer? The logo doesn't matter when the goal is disinformation and fracturing society to keep the heard moving as the oligarchs want. Try a different flavor since you seem to be full of the "it's all THEIR fault" crap. WE ALL are the society you deride since the copy at WSJ, NYT, FOX, CNN & CNBC is all written by the same folks who write for MTV's The Hills... and your favorite networks biggest cash cow.
http://www.americanidol.com/
Miles,
Happy belated Zero Hedge one year anniversary. According to the ZH Gods, you are one ZH year old.
Happy birthday Miles.
this is fantasic journalism. thank you ZH.
Indeed. A TD original and a fine example of why everyone here stays tuned.
The ABSOLUTE BEST!!!
ZH is THE site I get my biz/life info from; used to read FT and even the Alphaville team are drunk on that kool-aid.
Oh I don't know.... One day you're calling out the WSJ's connection to the Fed but on a previous day you try to convince the readership that Santelli is a superhero who has CNBC backed into a corner and has free will, "you can trust this guy. CNBC is good".
How about digging into CNBC's relationship to the Fed and how Immelt is also on the presidents recovery team responsible for pumping the story.
Half truth's, they'll keep you safe but still controversial(maybe they'll invite you to the club just to shut you up wink-wink). If I recall NYU Law School has a class devoted to the topic of "Silent Fraud", no? Did someone ace this class?
http://www.jewishcanton.org/92y_immelt.html
Capture.Obey or lose access to the "insiders".
Disgusting non commitment to what function the press is supposed to have.
And this is rampant.
Thank God for ZH and the other good journalists out there....until they are outlawed for national security reasons.
EPIC FAIL
Personality journalism.
The faces and personalities are more important than the facts. So, you have to have access to "high profile" people. It's like you're measured by the size and prestige of your rolodex and press people worship who you know and rub elbows with.
If you want truth, you've got here, RT, and Al Jazeera. Pains me to say this but the network of the terrrists has a higher veracity than US media. The system here is a big social club.
I mean I got video of Tim Russert (RIP) putting my son up on the Nats' home dugout during the 7th inning stretch. He was at the game with Jim Carville. How impartial can a journalist be when he is off-screen buddies with a frequent commentator? He's gonna nail his friend to the wall?
It's ALL fucking theatre.
This is great journalism indeed....
We've gotta figure out what we can actually "do" about all this instead of just be pissed off on a comment board.
I for one plan on leaving the country as soon as i get rich enough.
Good luck with that leaving the country thing.
You sound overleveraged.
It could take a while to sort that out...
Consider taking it to the streets, instead?
It's kinda my thing, im out to represent 95% of you.
Seems a bit low on courage. Instead, why don't you stay and try helping restore the Republic?
Nice work TD, and real work it must have been to find those needles in that haystack...
Regards
Nice Haystack! 195712 (and might I say, nice dir structure as well.)
WOW ... Thanks TD! (Thanks SIGTARP!)
One caught ... 999 to go
Just when I thought the level of corruption couldn't get any worse. Excellent work TD.
+1, this is all wrong. The incredulous attitude of the leaders, that they are immune to laws, is disgusting.
This process is called judicial exclusion and has been summed up by Cas Sunstein...
Prosecuting government officials risks a “cycle” of criminalizing public service, [Sunstein] argued, and Democrats should avoid replicating retributive efforts like the impeachment of President Clinton — or even the “slight appearance” of it.
http://jonathanturley.org/2008/07/21/obama-adviser-cass-sunstein-rejects...
"Just when I thought the level of corruption couldn't get any worse. Excellent work TD. "
Aahh, speak for yourself!
Corruption has no limits.
As it happens, I'm reading "American Empire: The Victorious Opposition" (a rather workmanlike alternate history of fascism in America). Then I read this article and I think Mr. Turtledove is going to have to start writing something more farfetched if he wants to stay in business.
I look forward to see how the msm will respnd to this. Was there ever a time that a story with potential magnitude like this would have been picked up and put on the front page of, let's say, the business section? I can't remember. (sarcasm off)
I am not a journalist, but I was unaware that you had to "clear" quotes with your source. If someone even speaks to someone they know is a reporter—much less gives an interview—that's the whole damn point: they're speaking on the record and you can use what they say. You have to explicitly grant them the ability to speak off the record.
Of course, then you'd lose access to the FRBNY's fabulous house parties.
Like they weren't making up the rules as they went along regarding AIG.
It depends on the reporter, the editor, and the news organization.
Some consider it an ethical violation, and others don't.
In my opinion, it depends on the context. In this case, there was clear corruption.
Sophist! Apostate I think you should change your moniker to 'Lysias' with all your 'depends' and your 'contexts'.
Spot on Charlie Brown.
Regards
Ha!
Ordinarily, I'm not so nuanced. If the story concerns a technical issue, it makes sense to get the story checked out. Any mainstream story on science or technology tends to send actual engineers and scientists into apoplexy as it is - that's when it's better to pass the story story for review before publishing.
If you're writing a political article, however, then passing quotes by the source before publishing is shoddy behavior.
Widepsread looting aboard Titanic.
Gah Dammit!
I tried to contact this bitch but her email is invalid. WTF? I was hoping to get Tyler another bitch besides Goldman Sacks.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Friedman_%28PFIAB%29
This Stephen Friedman who is the current Chairman of the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board?
Small world.
TD - Excellent work!
By the way, these slimeballs always like to use the phrase "appearance of conflict of interest". But it really is gross, gargantuan "conflict of interest". Friedman is the poster child for Conflict of Interest.
In the federal government executive branch, "conflict of interest" is not just "ethics". There are federal criminal conflict of interest statutes. Criminal conflict of interest statutes and some related statutes are listed at this Office of Government Ethics website.
http://www.usoge.gov/laws_regs/other_ethics_guidance/conflict_int_pros_s...
Unfortunately, these criminal statutes have not been enforced against Hank Paulson and other GS moles in government. As for the "Federal Reserve Bank of NY", they appear to be above any law...a power unto themselves.
While it tickles our romantic sense of justice to think that the main stream media (MSM) has always been free and only recently subverted, in reality the MSM has consistently promoted and protected the powers that be and political class. Of course, part of the illusion was and is the occasional gutting of an unfortunate patsy to engender the notion that the MSM is on "our" side, upholding truth and justice for all. My what big muscles you have Superman.
Now that we have passed over into full frontal fascism, while the effort will still be made to enable our self delusions, we need a double or triple dose of denial to swallow the blatantly obvious groveling of the MSM at the feet of the powers that be. You know, while I'm down here kissing your feet, it looks like the floor could use a good waxing. Want me to take care of that boss?
"I can't remember. (sarcasm off)"
Might explain why I can't remember.
"Now that we have passed over into full frontal fascism..."
Pure poetry CD. I know, 'cuz a connoisseur of the finer things in life once told me that real art will either turn you on or disgust you.
Now, I know that I should be nauseated by the quote above, and yet strangely....
Regards
"We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years... It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries."
- David Rockefeller, Bilderberg Meeting, June 1991 Baden, Germany
if the bilderberg meetings are closed to the press and under "chatham house rules" (no quotations) how exactly was this obtained? seems a little tooo perfect a quotation.
The theme of this quote is not something that is hidden. It is very open, in fact, here is a GHWBush Speech before Congress on (gasp) 9-11-1991 (ungasp):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7a9Syi12RJo
not that the media mentioned aren't notorious cia fronts. seriously.
+1
In the realm of the world, this doesn't matter to the small people...hence it is not news. Only when their pensions funds are on the last stage of life support will people begin to wonder what happened to the American dream.
Do you really think this is a blog for "small people"? Small people can chose to "get" all this or chose not to "get it".
Even messages from such "small" people as myself get rejected for "exceeding size limitations" on occasion... So, keep 'em grinnin' .. and dare to ask.
Someone hires a few pissed off Lehman boys who were wondering the streets after the implosion and they think they "get it". Flawed logic.
You know the practical side of this is if you don't do this you get cut off. The WSJ has always been a Wall Street shill so what would you expect? Having sais that, I have noticed that the WSJ and the NYP often breaks stories the squids would care not to see. The NY Fed is not going to enjoy Spitzers TV show.
The squid board is a nest of insider trading. Their MO is insider trading is ok on advice of counsel.
As far as I can tell, the main purpose of the public financial press is to facilitate insider trading.
It would be very tough to pull off significant insider trading without the influence of the SEC speech control regime.
Shoot, I wonder where the rest of the $2 trillion dollars went ? Gold bullion somewhere ?
are you referring to the $2 trillion dollars that was announced "missing" on the day before 9/11 by rumsfeld???
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xU4GdHLUHwU
or a different missing $2 trillion??
That second one is a 'Bitch' email. It would be important to know who's email address was redacted on that. Probably someone high on the food chain so as to 'subtly' bring it to their attention.
The parties on the inside already know who that name is under the blacked-out section. I guess this is way of being outed. LOL..........
Complete and utter lawlessness on all levels.
TD-Hey, do me a favor, would you?
If I ever make it onto your shit list, give me a call.
Give me a chance to apologize.
I guess I wasn't wrong in cancelling their subscription last year. Too much cheerleading lately in the WSJ when there should've been more news with what's going wrong in the economy.
And the feds want our tax dollars to prop up this industry. No wonder.
OMFG! NO WAY! The ignorant suck up scribblers who copy and paste press releases from the powerful ARE ACTUALLY COPYING AND PASTING PRESS RELEASES FROM THE POWERFUL!
Next someone is gonna tell me that rain is friggin' wet.
What's this world comming to?
You may have missed the 'needles in a haystack' analogy Misean...Certainly, in a rainstorm every drop is 'friggin wet', but in a maelstrom of prestidigitation it can be tough to tell exactly which drip is benefitting from the sleight of hand. So, hard evidence as a result of onerous 'delving' is appreciated. Capiche?
??
Would you have preferred I say "I'm shocked! SHOCKED!" In what way do I even come close to denigrating the "delving"?
9_9
Germany had its Nuremberg.
Where will the U.S. hold its war crimes trials, Mr. Blankfein?
same way kleptocracies always turn over, by the guillotine or Napoleon. One wrinkle is that the near monoethnicity of the finance elite may revisit us with cries of Reinhard should it come to that. Lack of diversity was never a problem coming, but sure evidence of persecution going.
Seriously. The NYFED and the WSJ is interesting but what about the FED and the WaPo ?
Sometimes ancient history can be as intriguing as current revelations...if you consider...
(Nah....Probably just another paranoid coincpsirance):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_Isaac_Meyer
[snip]:
"Eugene Isaac Meyer (October 31, 1875 – July 17, 1959) was an American financier, public official, publisher of the Washington Post newspaper. He served as Chairman of the Federal Reserve from 1930 to 1933. He was the father of publisher Katharine Graham."
Ahhh.... how nature ensures that, unopposed, the seeds of destruction will flourish from the bitter fruits of the tree of knowledge....
If Martha Stewart had to do time for making $40k on insider trading, this should be at least a couple of capital punishments, no? (Two for good measure)
She was one of the unfortunate patsies referred to above (used to show that the law is still "working"). Of course it doesn't seem to have hurt her too much - what a surprise.
and she wasn't napped for insider trading but for lying to investigators. if she had told the truth, in all likelihood she would have walked. she sold because her broker told her the stock's ceo was selling. that may or may not be inside information. as far as was revealed, she asked no more questions and said sell, later concocting a limit order story. the truth was ambiguous enough to prevent, imo, a successful prosecution.
capitol (there has been enough capital punishment already!)
bravo!!!!!!!!
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Gosh, working at the FRBNY (or any FRB for that matter) must be one of the easiest jobs on Earth.
ok... so another morsel of the criminal underbelly is exposed. and... what now? how long has this been going on? 50, 100, 150 years? they don't give a shit what is presented as evidence nor do the governing agencies. it's not going to change until we man up and from what i gather from reading the countless blogs, that ain't happening.
Defeatist.
"Let's Roll." It's been done before.
The general population doesn't care. Never have and never will. Until a significant power group decides on change, revolution never foments. The American revolution was started by its' leading citizens- not the average man.
The German people went along with Hitler. They never questioned his actions. They believed what their eyes told them were lies.
The only people capable of organizing revolution in America are too beholden to the system that provides their wealth and lifestyle. The poor are useless until their anger can be harnessed and that will require the ability to first buy their allegiance. They only understand a fair trade that promises enrichment- whether it is true or not.
We live in a fascist utopia where people are dependent on electronic media for information, forced into schools that teach prescribed propaganda and fed a steady diet of patriotism.
Looking for another alternative? Doesn't exist. You can create a secluded harbor, but its' protection will never be sure. Still, we plan and hope.
By the way, I am an optimist.
Liberty is the only currency of value. It's enemy is control and organization. Chaos or chains/slavery. Tough decision!
Bill Dudley = former Goldmanite, now with FRB
Bob Dudley = BP point man on spill response.
-- just sayin
Its Bo Diddley you have to worry about...
Like I said, there will be no election November of 2010
Never before -- since the creation of the Congressional budget process -- has the House failed to pass a budget, failed to propose a budget then deemed the non-existent budget as passed as a means to avoid a direct, recorded vote on a budget, but still allow Congress to spend taxpayer money. http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=37893By Online Monday, July 5, 2010 http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/25042
Reno, NV – Today U.S. Senator Harry Reid’s campaign was forced to take down a website that falsely represented itself as his opponent Nevada Senate Candidate Sharron Angle’s campaign website and attempted to deceive Angle supporters into giving their personal information to the Reid campaign. Reid’s campaign received a Cease and Desist Notice complaining of “nefarious actions,” including the abuses of proprietary materials from the Angle campaign website and for potentially violating the privacy of supporters who may have been submitting personal information to be used for U.S. Senate candidate Sharron Angle’s campaign.
That guy is the absolute epitome of sleaze.
Slam dunk the punks !!
Strike that. Calling the actions of the WSJ "punk" is a major disrespect to the hard working punks confined at penitentiaries all across the nation.
BTW Tyler, it is good to see that the memory of Mark Pittman is is being kept alive and well by someone in the "New Media". Thank you !!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNYElq6ZRaE
FRBNY-TOWNS-R1-144 991
(Blackrock)
The relationships are important because we are able to successfully leverage our strong relationships to originate an attractive portfolio
We have grown our portfolio considerably over the last years. Our total leveraged exposure is approximately 4x that of the average institutional asset manager. We are one of the 2 leading European banks to establish a CDO program.
While we have been focused on growth it has not come at any cost. We have grown conservatively
And probably most importantly our disciplined approach to originating and managing our portfolio has allowed us to achieve an enviable track record
We have only experienced E12.8m of losses against 4 defaults on a portfolio of over $3bn
To know only if questioned
Leveraged Loan Stats Institutional Euro-mm Reference
ICG 600 Promus IIdebt bk
ING 432 Copernicus I & II
BCAM 1465 Jub I pitch + Jub I + Jubll
832
Banks
NIB 1800 NIB pitch bk
AIB 3000 Galway Bay pitch bk
BOI 3000
3.12 2600
FRBNY-TOWNS-R1-145028.pdf found in http://documents.republicans.oversight.house.gov/E-mails-and-electronic-files/Whynott%20e-mails%20and%20electronic%20files.zip
is 65 pages of Blackrock tranche data
Also in the whynott zip file,
FRBNY-TOWNS-R1-145244.pdf
is
MASTER AGREEMENT among CITIGROUP INC, DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION and FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF NEW YORK
Once again, if ever written or spoken about besides this forum, the "jewish control of media", will be treated as just so much anti-semitism.
Can it be anti-semitism and STILL be the truth?
there's nothing wrong with the Jews.. just a million things wrong with everyone else..
and remember kiddies - all these MSM are just feeding their demographic which already has an established agenda... they do not need to come up with one themselves
Imagine how surprised you will be when you discover that ZH is owned by a jewish fellow who is trying to control the media.
As a former journalist who has been in similar situations to this, I have to say that there's not enough information in these documents for me to judge exactly what happened. But perhaps I can lend some insights.
It is not unusual for an investigative journalist to offer, or a subject of a journalist's investigation to demand, that he be allowed to clear his own quotes. This is ostensibly to protect the subject from being quoted out of context, but both sides know the real reason is to protect the subject from saying something he later regrets. It's like taking an interview off the record, with a tentative agreement that the subject will allow most of it to come on the record, after he's read it. Wealthy subjects or those working for big organizations will typically have a flack with them at the interview, whose job it is to tell him which comments he might regret, both while he's speaking and later when he's clearing the quotes. So effectively, such interviews are censored, often for the sort of organizational PR reasons that seem to be at stake in this case. I'm sure the WSJ reporter pre-agreed some kind of similar conditions for this interview. But it's not clear exactly what conditions. The flack's use of "I suggest" could mean several things: that the Fed/Friedman didn't get a 100% solid right to revoke anything they wanted; that the flack is not the final decision-maker on the Fed/Friedman side and is willing to bow to Friedman or someone else at the Fed; or that the flack is putting on a lenient pose by expressing at an early point in negotiations less than adamant disapproval, figuring that many of the quotes she marked would probably be cut for space reasons anyway, and relying on the journalist's reluctance to possibly waste time by pressing her side to clear some quote he figures ultimately won't be cleared anyway.
ssshhh! They cancelled Seinfeld after Pat Buchanan ran his mouth last time. Don't screw up 2.5 men for me too.
Really this is a great post from an expert and thank you very much for sharing this valuable information with us..................... windows vps | cheap vps | cheap hosting | forex vps