GruberGate: "Senator" Obama Vs "President" Obama

Tyler Durden's picture

What a difference a few years makes...


Here is "President" Obama this week at the G-20 Summit distancing himself as far as possible from Jon Gruber...

2014: President Obama on Jon Gruber


"some adviser who never worked on our staff expressed an opinion that I completely disagree with"



And here is Senator Obama speaking at a 2006 Brookings Institution meeting, cozying up to Gruber and other academics...

2006: Senator Obama On Jon Gruber


"the brightest minds from academia and policy circles, many of them I have stolen ideas from liberally, people ranging from Robert Gordon to Jon Gruber"


*  *  *

Once again, Obama is The King of Denial


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
ekm1's picture

I have linked several times on ZH that video from another source, to prove that Obama was brought to power from bank lobby.


Check the background:

Bob Rubin


Where is the meeting?

Hamilton Project at Brookings


Who is the founder of Hamilton Project?

Bob Rubin


Who did Obama bail out?

Citigroup, Bob Rubin, Warren Buffett


What did Quantitative Easing do?

Continue bail out of warren buffett, primary dealers.


NYPoke's picture

Who hasn't been elected by the Bank Lobby?  Ford & Johnson.  Did I miss somebody?

ekm1's picture

No. Bank lobby took power after soviet union collapse when Military Complex thought that they won and yielded power to bank lobby.


They have regretted it 

emersonreturn's picture

thank you, ekm1.  i'm so glad you a) returned, b) continue to hang around.  your insights invariably provide much to consider.

nope-1004's picture

Obama is a fraud, liar, and dope head.  You can tell when he talks that he doesn't even know what his words mean.


rcintc's picture

is anyone is actually surprised that he lied again?

If he were my son, he would have gotten a smack in the head everytime he lied.


NoDebt's picture

Obama would lie even if telling the truth served a better purpose.  It's what he does.  It's who he is.

If the military wants to sit back at the head of the table of power, as EKM says, I wish the military good luck with that pplan.  They're the only major chunk of the government budget that has seen ACTUAL CUTS.  They've also bleeding headcount (on purpose) and the military leadership at high levels has been replaced with administration puppets, starting with Chuck Hagel.

The FSA (entitlements) are winning.  Their budgets run on auto-pilot with both COLAs and demographics automatically taking a larger percentage of the pie every year.  Checkmate, FSA.

KnuckleDragger-X's picture

That's about the way I see it and there isn't a good way out. A big crisis, especially in the markets will cause the house of cards to start a tumble with many knock on effect coming online. The 'smart' people think it can't happen but history has proven them wrong far too often for any wise person to bet any other way.

TahoeBilly2012's picture

Obamacare will be nothing compared to the other coming "programs". 

OW My Balls's picture

You've been Grubered


Obama: "We can do this, quick hand me that bucket filled with bum sperm!"

Richard Chesler's picture

We corrupted some folks...


SilverIsKing's picture

Yet 40% still think he walks on water.

Richard Chesler's picture

This post courtesy of zerohedge spam.


Bob's picture

Yeah, that's an inconvenient fact.  If they've been "sitting back," it's because they've been busy collecting the money--and doing it in their own bizarrely unauditable ways:

The only government department that has been unable to pass a simple audit . . . for over twenty years.  Yet none of the blowhard "fiscal hawks" in Congress have uttered a single peep about it. 

It's not hard to see where the most privileged parasites live in the .gov apparatus.  Snuggling warmly between Congress' precious ass cheeks.

BrosephStiglitz's picture

Vested interests and dishonesty are a fair point NoDebt.

Another point is the absolute disconnect of these "policy making" folks from the real world.  If you spend your entire life with your nose in legal, or economic textbooks, you get people working around theoretical models.  I can go around economists that I know and pick the guys who have spent (even just two years of) time in the private sector.  Krugman is a classic example of a theoretical economist.  He is a smart guy, he honestly is, but living in an utter dream world*.

It is the equivalent of putting a 17 year old teenager in a racecar because they have watched a lot of NASCAR, or Formula 1, on TV.  Chances are that kid is going to end up in a fireball on the side of the track.

Used to be, or so I am told, that people had to work through some tough times and there was a wider overlap between public sector and private sector experience.  Being a politician should not be a full time career path for academics from ivory towers.  Nor should it be the most lucrative, and best paid position around.  It is a (fairly) secure income, barring catastrophic events which might happen to a well-managed country once every two to three generations, and your average individual in the private sector faces significantly more risk in their job.  It should be a pursuit of public interest for, hopefully, well-meaning citizens who come from a range of backgrounds.

I see these jackasses gutting the economy, threatening war, and pushing us dangerously close to a very serious outcome, and all the while adding on more and more layers of legal jargon, excessive spending, and bureaucracy.  This is a very real and serious issue.

*Edit: and one final point- I do not detract from academic work.  It has its place.  Krugman is a workhorse, which is something I can respect, even if his opinions and solutions are often highly impractical in the real world.  I just literally got out of a discussion about the labor force, where an economist (a real Krugman type) suggested that the government should "seek to set the minimum wage at the market equilibrium."  I cannot tell you how flawed this idea is.  Even if the equilbrium between labor supply and demand WERE static, which it isn't, the mathematical probability of anyone picking a number out of thin air and hitting the exact figure they need to on a continuous probability distribution is zero.  Yes.  His suggestion was mathematically impossible.

This is the sort of thinking we need to be wary of.  He is a very booksmart guy.  He knows it, and he overreaches with theoretical models.  Attempting to apply them to the real world.

Patel fan's picture

Yeah, I have always thought he is just reading what's given to him.  Reward: more dope.

tc06rtw's picture


He didn’t know he was gonna be President when he said that !

FreedomGuy's picture

Electronic recording devices and internet storage are a bitch.

This may be one of the best smoking guns in my lifetime. It is right up there with Wild Bill Clinton and the "I did not have sex with that woman." followed by the blue stained dress.


piratepiet's picture

yes, but ekm1 is imho often a bit too sure of himself.  A lot of interesting conjecture, not many sources to back it up.

He seems to have a strong intuition, but intuition alone is not enough. 

NYPoke's picture

Not being an arse or anything.  Just that these are the same people.  Bankers finance & run the Military.  Very profitable business.


Goes centuries back, but the Federal Reserve Act was implemented for one reason: Finance WWI, which hasn't really stopped.

ekm1's picture

No. Military does not need any financing. It can simply go and get it by force.

It is the bankers who need military, not vice versa

holdbuysell's picture

I find it hard to square this view with Smedley Butler's points of war being a racket for corporations and banks.

ekm1's picture

Militaries who cross the borders of their national states 'hire' others to allocate the "booty" they seize.

If those whom they hire do not do proper allocation or backstab them, they simply get told first and then eliminated if resistance occurs.


That is human history. That is the concept how roman army or british army operated under, distribution of seized booty


Praetorian guards killed many, many emperors for simply failing to pay expected wages in gold/silver


Bank lobby has wasted the booty. They will be out soon. Other oligarchs are ready to be hired in exchange for loyalty

MsCreant's picture

Interesting. Your puppet comes to life and betrays you. Pinocchio?

Bay of Pigs's picture

I dont know about this crap Missy. ZH seems captivated by ekm1 and his "predictions". How he figures the Bank Lobby is "dead" is beyond me. Look at the facts.....record profits and bonuses. Same old bullshit.

ekm1's picture

Look at the facts.

Business is being taken away, theft is being published.

Harm by attrition.

TeethVillage88s's picture

ekm1 you posted like 18 hours ago, but tend to agree you don't see all the groups or explain them well, you don't explain much very well at all, and clearly you see a black or white situation most often... which seems a cognitive error.

For instance CIA is known to create or find banking, funding, enterprises, maybe gold or wealth to help with their own activities. I just don't see that in the $1 Trillion Dollar MIC.

Where is the Power:

- New York, London, EU Banks, they can create money for any asset investment, or loan, or to re-sell something
- MIC, including the DoD, Engineering Firms, Energy Firms, Infrastructure Firms, Oil Firms, Logistics Firms, Outsourcing Firms
- Big Pharma
- Big Agriculture & Chemicals
- Oil & Gas, Mining, & Chemicals
- Lobbying, Wealthy, Elites, International Organizations like WB, IMF, BIS, OECD, UN, WTO, UNESCO, WHO, ASEAN, G8, G20, BRICS

I'll have to repost this where you post again this week.

winchester's picture
winchester (not verified) MsCreant Nov 18, 2014 4:49 AM



" i just voted for him coz he's got big nose "

Shumbies's picture

And the Banksters can get it by farce...

overmedicatedundersexed's picture

today one is confused reading comments like: obuma is a repub, we knew it all along he was an R...a neocon.

well he got caught in another lie, and some of our progressive types can't come to grips with it so they must justify his actions as not one of a true progressive like ahh gruber oh shit.

piratepiet's picture



"Military does not need any financing".

Robert Skidelsky ( Emeritus Professor of Political Economy at the University of Warwick, England ) on Nial Ferguson's book The Ascent of Money :

'An often enlightening and enjoyable tour through the underside of great events, a lesson in how the most successful great powers have always been underpinned by smart money' ( Italics are mine )

Your thinking is really too compartimentalized.  You do not seem to see the links, complementarities and mutual dependencies of various players.  And you seem obsessed by a almost life-or-death power struggle between different groups of the American power elite, which I doubt is taking place.   

If you are, maybe unconsciously, hinting at the risk of an escalation of ethnic conflict in USA ( like we have seen in Europe ), then I agree there needs to be continued concern and attention to prevent that.    

InjectTheVenom's picture

Just another PHONY scandal , right , Barry ?

Bear's picture

I think George Washington made it own his own.

armageddon addahere's picture

You mean before he married the rich widow or after? By the way if you have never seen Washington's wartime  expense account you are in for a shock.

Billy the Poet's picture

That was a popular paperback in the 1970s.

NYPoke's picture

Love 'ole Hickory.  However, wasn't he put in by the Whigs?  They were our version of the main Republican Party.  The Tea Party of the time, the Patriots, were the non-Banker Conservatives.  The Whigs were largely Bankers.


Could be wrong.  I think he was a early version of Bush Boys.

McCormick No. 9's picture

You're wrong, Jackson was a Democrat. In fact, he founded the Democratic party, which had been called, in the truthful spirit if the age, the Repiblican-Democrat party. (Look it up) Today, we have come full circle and again have the same party, only now we don't have any Whigs to counter it. As the first Democrat, Jackson advocated for western states, opening up trade routes, killing Indians, and destroying Central Banking power. Kind of a mixed bag, but I am pretty sure if he saw Obama he would have run the mulatto down in the street, flogged him with his cane, and then pistol whipped him and sent him back to the plantation.

drendebe10's picture

Once a fudge packer, always a fudge packer.

MontgomeryScott's picture

Ford wasn't elected.

He was APPOINTED (by, of course, the Ziocon banker lobby).

Part of his reward for taking part in the Warren Commission report.

WHIP INFLATION NOW! Roll over, Liberty...

ekm1's picture

Here's the full speech, from the source I used to post this several times on ZH in the past

radiobomb's picture

thnx for above link.

The election budget directly influences the # of votes. So Wall St candidate wins, [as everyone else has to pay with real money and therefor cannot compete], and the newly elected puppet starts QE & Zirp for Wall St, dwarfing the origional 'investment' they made by a huge margin.

1$-in-18$ ratio of QE $ reaching Main st.

Did I miss anything out ?    ...<rhetorical Q>

g&#039;kar's picture

The pre-teleprompter Obola reading annoyingly from his prepared notes.

stant's picture

Will SNL do a new Mcgruber skit?

madbraz's picture

It is a fact, he is a creation of Bob Rubin. The perfect candidate, groomed and tamed, incapable of going against them. They have him by the balls.