This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Ratigan Asks Important Questions In Advance Of Tomorrow's Bank Of America Congressional Hearing
Ahead of tomorrow's Committee of Oversight and Congressional Reform hearing on the Bank Of America - Merrill Lynch strong-arming by the Fed, entitled "Bank of America and Merrill Lynch: How Did a Private Deal Turn Into a Federal Bailout? Part IV" (which may or may not happen), Dylan Ratigan discusses some salient points with California Republican Darrell Issa. As a reminder, prominent witnesses tomorrow will be BofA GC Tim Mayopolous and Directors Charles Gifford and Thomas May.
Ratigan asks some important questions: "Why trillions of dollars in US taxpayer money are given to casino gamblers to do whatever they want with and then it is used for political purposes...Why America's taxpayer money is being used to subsidize casino gambling as a lifestyle and why Larry Summers, Hank Paulson and Tim Geithner were able to do that."
And here is some clarification for CNBC anchor Caruso-Cabrera on why the prosecution of misdeed at Bank of America is just a little bit more than AG Andrew Cuomo trying to get a few swing votes.
Ratigan: "The bank CEO knows what going on, the bank CEO knows it's ok for you to take a trillion worth of risk knowing he only has $50 billion in the basement that is taxpayer sponsored. That is the crime is it not."
Darrell Issa: Directors and officers of a company have a fiduciary obligation to the stockholders and that's what the basis for the SEC settlement was, it's the reason the judge wants to see more disclosure: these people had an obligation to disclose honestly to the stockholders. They appear both not to have disclosed honestly, and then covered up even additional events. Unfortunately they seem to have covered it up with the aid of Secretary Geithner, Secretary Paulson and others, and that's really what we have to get to the bottom of. We can't have government blaming greedy corporate America and then being conspirators just because it serves their best interest.
And some words of warning for Tim Geithner:
"The fact that Geithner is now in the cross hairs is causing people to say "oh wait a second, that is too close to President Obama" but the truth is President Obama is better jettisoning Geithner if he did wrong before he had this job, than he is going along with him as he becomes discredited when he says TARP money is important.... TARP money is slush money... it is campaign money."
We also enjoin Darrel Issa's call for readers to approach their elected officials
to finally get to the bottom of this debacle before it is too late, and
everyone has forgotten we were on the verge of a precipice and nothing
changes until the next time the bubble pops and takes all of America
with it. Indeed, this is not a left/right issue, it is a right/wrong issue.
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
»
- 4238 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
the rehabilitation of Rattner's reputation (with a bit of help from the Axelrod Propaganda machine)
Revisionism 101
Rattner giving speech in DC at 1pm (on Bloomberg TV)
http://www.bloomberg.com/streams/video/LiveBTV200.asx
Rattner:
"neither I, nor anyone on 'Team Auto' was a Czar or a Czarette"
"in that March speech President Obama made a strong and muscular decision"
Where do I sign the petittion that replaces Neil Barofsky with Darrell Issa?
...everyone has forgotten we were on the verge of a precipice and nothing changes until the next time the bubble pops and takes all of America with it.
Death to America
Recall please that Ratigan, when on CNBC, ginned up the casino pretty good with his fake trading buddies and "lightening fast" market calls. He is clearly out of his intellectual depth on MSNBC and is throwing around some ill-defined populist hogwash in a bid for ratings. This guy has no command of the issues - none. There is reason for populist outrage but this idiot couldn't find it with both hands!
It seemed to me that Ratigan and Issa have a pretty good command of the major themes at work here, his previous broadcasting appearances notwithstanding. It is apparent to me that unless these issues are discussed in public in a reasonably digestible (populist?) format, then they are unlikely to gain traction. The fact is that very few, if any, Congressmen even comprehend the majority of the legislation that their staff members are writing for them. That being the case, how do you expect the rest of the country to have a grasp on the incredible scope and complexity of the fraud, waste, and abuse that has been going on?
I think the point he made regarding right v wrong is well taken and if that is populist hogwash then perhaps you can get you own blog up and enlighten us all with the dazzling complexities and your comprehensive solutions. If nothing else, taking a few scalps and whipping up some well justified anger among the public can serve as a deterrent for future abuse and as a catalyst for current reform.
There is no doubt that Ratigan was a major part of the pump machine at CNBC for many years. And he should be held to account for his actions.
BUT there came a point last year when Ratigan clearly changed his tune on CNBC and began to ramp up the open hostility to the orchestrated CNBC (and other MSM) market pump. And based upon what I have seen, I feel that the change of tune came about honestly.
It wasn't overnight for Ratigan. You could see it slowly changing as he witnessed the wholesale rape of the world. By Sept and Oct of 2008 Ratigan was loudly and repeatedly calling out the scum and he was getting heat for his words from CNBC brass.
Sorry but until I see or hear otherwise, I'm giving Ratigan the benefit of the doubt on this one. Of course he's first and foremost a salesman and he's going to take advantage of his pulpit to keep his advertisers and bosses happy. To think otherwise isn't living in reality.
But the man is making an attempt to call out the guard when everyone else in the MSM is still marching to the tune of pump and pump some more.
awesome response. could not have said it better myself.
Last fall, I blasted letters to alot of people, Ratigan was one, and i also wrote the washington puppets (before i realized they were actually clear with their intentions to legislate criminality ) and economic leaders, who might be willing to consider the crimes that were unfolding. Ratigan CLEARLY either read some of these letters or he was just right on the mark seeing what was happening. The difference between Ratigan and his CNBC peers, is that he is brave.
Paulson and Bernake didnt take the one day to ask Congress for authority to unwind TOOCRIMINALTO FAIL, but instead, they took THREE WEEKS to lobbying for TARP, and one of the most obvious grotesque feasts of this coup d'etat to steal the future of America, was the DAY after TARP passes, Paulson invites all his brothers to treasury to pass out money.....
DYLAN WAS JUST LIKE THE LITTLE BOY WHO SAID, HEY, THE EMPORER HAS NO CLOTHES ON...and all the other people around him were too cowardly to say that they knew it too.
At this time in our history, you could ask anyone (just try it) if they believe that the bank "bailout" of last fall was a heist and you would get at a resounding HELL YEA, and this doesn't take any sophistocated understanding of CDS's. Unless the country votes out all of these people who are puppets legislating criminality and replace them with honest people like Daryl Issa, WE ARE F@#$%^&* SCREWED.
( DJ ) 10/21 01:09PM *DJ General Electric To Launch $250M Healthcare IT Venture Fund
hmmmmm........ who want to bet that there is something in the proposed health care legislation that makes this a VERY viable fund!
His point about TARP is spot on... that money should be returned and used to pay off the deficit. The Constitution calls for spending to go through Congress, not the executive branch (nor the Federal Reserve for that matter) and the Congress never approved the money to be spent on the car industry or even buying shares of financial services companies.
geithner is being set up. Come on - what do you think the hero wiorship and media puff stories on Jamie Dimopn are> when all credibility is lost (we are about there) Obama will try to pull in Jamie Dimon to save the world just like he saved JPM. Diimon is a major operator in the Democratic parety and an insiders favorite. The media will fawn over him and the market will rally as he pounds the POMO button.
Look at the order and way in which the financials are reporting - do you think it is a coincidence. Go back to the summer last year when WFC kicked off the run in financial stocks with a dividend riase and a "beat." Now look - GS kicks it off with a blowout to be followed by JPM then the laggards after the good news is out. WFC - the most amazing head scratcher - brngs up the rear the following weak with its steller results on a hedging beat. Looks like Wells is getting a 9.6% yield on thier commercial and resdiential MBS portoflio ($40B) & getting a 5.34 on their agency MBS portfolio. Net cost of credit is 0.84% (deposits yields avg. 0.57%). If this isn't a picture of whats wrong - there isn't any hope
Geithner, Summers, Rubin, Greenspan, all took a major beating on PBS' "The Warning" last night. Geithner, like Bernanke, were kept around because they knew where the bodies were burried, and more importantly, HOW to bury them. I agree with you that Turbo Tax Tim is gone, ONLY if The Chosen One wins mid-terms and 2012. If The Chosen One can't buy the media, or angers the finance community, replacing Geithner becomes moot.
Nice cover for the Vanity Fair crowd last night. Instead of acknowledging the fundraising weakness of the Chosen One, they make the excuse that the ARS' "Too Big To Fail" book premiere at Monkey Bar exempted the Wall Street powerful from attending. Nice try clowns.
Stevm30 - the 3 page proposal for TARP was so vague as to TARP's uses...as to be, well, useless. TARP funds were finally GIVEN to banks so they could shore up their balance sheets against losses made on mortgage and real estate derivatives. Instead, FAS rolled over on mark to market and TARP money went to leveraging trading postiions. As for the Constitution...does not seem like that was even considered in this ..in fact, Paulson specifically stated in his 3 page missive...that there be no legal recourse on TARP loans.
Use of TARP funds for loans to small business is necessary since banks are not lending to businesses, for home or commercial real estate...or for C&I. (last 2 senior lending officer surveys). Bank lending has spiraled at a faster pace than loan demand over the past 2 quarters and shows no sign of turning around...even though there are signs of demand. Let's face it...the banks don't want to be in the loan business...they want to be in the trading business so the Treasury and FED have to become the bank of last resort for consumers and businesses....it's a mess!
froggy, no need for anger or insults. you can read what i write every day if you'd like...just go to ____.com..economic policy news service based in d.c. credentialed w/ treasury, white house, commerce, labor, agricluture, house and senate. no guarantee you'll be dazzled but you might find it interesting.
Ratigan is trying to lead Issa: About 50 times he says, It’s the CEO, It’s the CEO. That’s not true. It’s also the Officers and the Board. And you know what a Board is? It represents a lot of different interlocking companies, revolving directorships and the complicated baggage of interests that they all carry to the table.
It’s important to remember that the BofA directors at the time the events of Countrywide and Merrill were occurring represent potential mind fields of financial interests that Ken Lewis and his officers had to keep in mind concerning their decisions. It’s the board that has the authority to get rid of a CEO at any time
Issa’s quote above is correct except for one word. Was it with the “aid” of the government officials, or was it by the “demand” of the government officials that there was cover up and no disclosure? The whole question is: Why was the government, Paulson and Bernanke first, then Geithner and Summers later, why were they so interested in having BofA take Merrill and keep it quiet, in fact, ordering Lewis to keep it quiet? And then, why did Geithner and Summers come along and stonewall the reasons for the operation and the details of other bailouts?
Suspiciously, it looks as if the government is using taxpayer money to protect and reward its particular friends with bailout money and manipulations. We’re going to know a lot more after we begin to see the emails and the timelines.
BofA’s current Directors are:
Walter E. Massey, (70)
Chairman of the Board, Bank of America Corporation
Susan S. Bies, (62)
Former Member, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
William P. Boardman, (67)
Retired Vice Chairman, Banc One Corporation and Retired Chairman of the Board, Visa International
Frank P. Bramble, Sr. (60)
Former Executive Officer, MBNA Corporation
Virgis W. Colbert, (69)
Senior Advisor, MillerCoors Company
Charles K. Gifford, (66)
Former Chairman, Bank of America Corporation
Charles O. Holliday, Jr., (61)
Chairman, E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Co. (DuPont)
D. Paul Jones, (66)
Former Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President, Compass Bancshares, Inc.
Kenneth D. Lewis, (61)
Chief Executive Officer and President, Bank of America Corporation
Monica C. Lozano, (52)
Publisher and Chief Executive Officer, La Opinion
Thomas J. May , (61)
Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer, NSTAR
Donald E. Powell , (67)
Former Chairman, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
Charles O. Rossotti, (68)
Senior Advisor, The Carlyle Group
Thomas M. Ryan, (56)
Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer, CVS/Caremark Corporation
Robert W. Scully, (59)
Former Member, Office of the Chairman of Morgan Stanley
Four are new directors to the Bank of America Board, announced June 5, 2009: Bies, Boardman, Jones and Powell.
Why are the Paulson's and the Geithner's, these Goldman Sachs officials, even in the government? People voted for Barack Obama with his talk of the graft in Washington. And he went in there and fixed it... with Geithner and Larry Summers. Just how involved are these people in this current trial?
Issa: re: TARP; we should vote before any more taxpayer money, I should say money borrowed from the Chinese, is spent...
correction: no, that would be money printed by the Fed.
Merril had the best monetary incentives to take money off the books and the lawyers\ Lewis's\B of A's complicity would be logical next action for men acting with too much hubris.
Issa is Republican of the all Government sucks, give money to my people, blame the democrat variety. He was on TV one night telling a crowd of (teabagger) people that the gov cannot have a deficit because of the tax cuts b\c that would mean Ronald Reagan was wrong. Issa a hard core Pub and is should not be viewed as a credible source of information. He's in the crowd arguing that Pubs can do no wrong; that Gov mistakes are a reason to let repeal rules and to let chaos reign (but meanwhile, take from the society and give lots of money to my buddies.) Paulson was the Pub's appointment and he drove the deal. The Pubs always emphasize Geithner as a demon because they want to blame the demos and to hell with reality.
The regulators might have been stupid but its hard to see why they would be dishonest about the Merril bonus payments. The most logical explanation is that the regulators got conned--its not like they did not have a lot of S--t going on--and now the crooks are making up a story to blame the government in order to keep their stolen profits. The only regulator guy with a dollar in the room was probably Paulson, front or back end.
I don't quite understand why Issa is giving all these talks. Just recently he called Ken Lewis a "patriot" and was not quite sure why the Oversight committee is going after BofA
http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=1281580716&play=1
Most of the heavy lifting during the committee hearings came from Democrats - Towns, Kucinich, Kaptur, while Issa was much more cautious and even apologetic. His statement that it was Democrats that delay the hearing is just partisan politics.