Home News Screener Maps Groups Portfolio Insider Collaborate Forum
  • Search

Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Members | Log In | Register

The TRUTH About the $700 Billion "BAILOUT": Options
zigzagman
Posted: Sunday, November 16, 2008 9:11:47 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 8/14/2008
Posts: 314
Location: Memphis
Paulson, Kashkari and CONgress - All Frauds!

A video is worth 10,000 words.
Funny how the truth comes out after The American People have been looted!
Not only was Congress lied to, but Congress lied to us!

http://market-ticker.denninger.net/




www.stock-market-lessons.com
zigzagman
Posted: Monday, November 17, 2008 12:23:36 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 8/14/2008
Posts: 314
Location: Memphis
TikiTim
Posted: Monday, November 17, 2008 8:49:34 PM

Rank: Newbie

Joined: 11/10/2008
Posts: 7


"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs. "

Thomas Jefferson, Letter to the Secretary of the Treasury Albert Gallatin (1802)
3rd president of US (1743 - 1826)

A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is privately concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men who, even if their action be honest and intended for the public interest, are necessarily concentrated upon the great undertakings in which their own money is involved and who necessarily, by very reason of their own limitations, chill and check and destroy genuine economic freedom. This is the greatest question of all, and to this statesmen must address themselves with an earnest determination to serve the long future and the true liberties of men.

Woodrow Wilson.

From Sir Josiah Stamp. Director Bank of England 1940:

..if you want to be slaves of bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, then let the bankers control money and control credit."

zigzagman
Posted: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 8:24:04 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 8/14/2008
Posts: 314
Location: Memphis
Paulson, Bernanke Rebuked on Hill:

Lawmakers Criticize Use of TARP, Want Some Funds to Go Toward Curbing Foreclosures.

By MICHAEL R. CRITTENDEN

WASHINGTON -- Increasingly restive lawmakers greeted Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke with a wave of criticism Tuesday, questioning their efforts to implement the financial-rescue package and assailing Treasury's reluctance to be more aggressive on preventing foreclosures.

Paulson, Bernanke and Bair testified Wednesday before the House Financial Services Committee on Capitol Hill.

Mr. Paulson has $60 billion remaining from the first installment of his rescue fund and said Monday he wants to hold it in reserve -- along with the second tranche of $350 billion -- for unforeseen emergencies and for the Obama administration. At the hearing before the House Financial Services Committee, lawmakers pressed Mr. Paulson instead to use the money to help stem the record numbers of foreclosures that continue to weigh on the economy.

"The fundamental policy issue is our disappointment that funds are not being used out of the $700 billion to supplement mortgage foreclosure reduction," Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D., Mass.) said in his opening remarks.

Mr. Paulson agreed it is "very important to stop the cascade of foreclosures" but resisted the entreaties to use the Troubled Asset Relief Program to address the issue. He noted that the Bush administration and financial companies have put in place a number of programs to help cash-strapped borrowers and said the best way to address foreclosures is "to increase access to lower-cost mortgage lending."

Both Democrats and Republicans on the House Financial Services Committee were pointedly critical about the implementation of the rescue plan passed by Congress in October. Lawmakers focused on Mr. Paulson's announcement last week that Treasury wouldn't use the TARP to purchase bad assets -- the rescue plan's original intent -- as well as the administration's vacillations about which firms are eligible and how the program will be conducted.

"Changing too quickly, without adequately explaining why you've changed or what you're going to do next, risks sending mixed signals to a marketplace that is in dire need of certainty and a sense of direction," said Rep. Spencer Bachus of Alabama, the panel's top Republican.

Representatives from the banking industry said the many changes to the program, and the uncertainty about which firms will be eligible and what requirements they will face, has eroded some of the confidence it was intended to create.

American Bankers Association Chairman and CEO Edward Yingling said the program has helped calm financial markets, but said it has also been a "source of great frustration and uncertainty to banks."

The Bush administration has been locked in an internal debate over a proposal from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. that the agency estimates could help prevent as many as 1.5 million foreclosures. The plan to provide a federal guarantee to share in any losses on modified mortgage loans has received wide support from lawmakers.

It has met with resistance from Treasury and the White House officials, who worry it could provide a windfall to banks and encourage people to stop paying their mortgages.

"We don't know if that's the appropriate use for that money," White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said of using TARP funds to pay for the FDIC plan.

The testimony Tuesday hinted at this growing tension. In her own comments, FDIC Chairman Sheila Bair said policy makers can't rely on existing programs. "Today, the stakes are too high to rely exclusively on industry commitments to apply more streamlined loan modification protocols," Ms. Bair said.

She was backed by Rep. Nydia Velázquez (D., N.Y.). "You don't have the strategy to mitigate foreclosures...she does," Ms. Velázquez said to Mr. Paulson.

Mr. Bernanke, when asked about Ms. Bair's proposal, said it could be improved but appeared to endorse the general concept of the plan.

"Just in general, I want to say this is a very promising approach," Mr. Bernanke said.

Despite Mr. Paulson's apparent reluctance to support a new foreclosure plan, Mr. Frank said he was optimistic that Treasury would implement some program before Obama takes office in January. Speaking to reporters after the hearing, Mr. Frank said he was confident "we will have a TARP-funded program."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122701809545436757.html




www.stock-market-lessons.com
zigzagman
Posted: Friday, November 21, 2008 12:45:03 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 8/14/2008
Posts: 314
Location: Memphis
Paulson Was Behind Bailout Martial Law Threat:

Paul Joseph Watson
Thursday, November 20, 2008

Senator James Inhofe has revealed that Henry Paulson was behind the threats of martial law and a new great depression prior to the passage of the bailout bill, having made such warnings during a conference call on September 19th, around two weeks before the legislation was eventually approved by both the Senate and Congress.

As we reported at the time, on October 2, Democratic Congressman Brad Sherman gave a stunning speech on the House floor during which he decried the fact that, “Many of us were told in private conversations that if we voted against this bill on Monday that the sky would fall, the market would drop two or three thousand points the first day, another couple of thousand the second day, and a few members were even told that there would be martial law in America if we voted no.”

A few days before, Rep. Michael Burgess also told the House, “Mr. Speaker I understand we are under Martial Law as declared by the speaker last night,” referring to a temporary suspension of the rules and procedures of Congress by its leaders so that a bill can be passed quickly.

But the origin of the most dire warnings about physical martial law in America, to which Sherman was likely referring, has now been exposed.

Speaking on Tulsa Oklahoma’s 1170 KFAQ, when asked who was behind threats of martial law and civil unrest if the bailout bill failed, Senator James Inhofe named Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson as the source.

“Somebody in D.C. was feeding you guys quite a story prior to the bailout, a story that if we didn’t do this we were going to see something on the scale of the depression, there were people talking about martial law being instituted, civil unrest….who was feeding you guys this stuff?,” asked host Pat Campbell.

“That’s Henry Paulson,” responded Inhofe, “We had a conference call early on, it was on a Friday I think – a week and half before the vote on Oct. 1. So it would have been the middle … what was it – the 19th of September, we had a conference call. In this conference call – and I guess there’s no reason for me not to repeat what he said, but he said – he painted this picture you just described. He said, ‘This is serious. This is the most serious thing that we faced.’”

Inhofe said that Paulson told members of Congress the crisis would be “far worse than the great depression” if Congress didn’t authorize the bill to buy out toxic debt, a proposal “which he abandoned the day after he got the money,” added Inhofe.

Inhofe is referring to the controversy last week when it emerged that the bailout money was not going to buy up toxic debt but instead Paulson, the former CEO of Goldman Sachs, had pulled a bait and switch and ordered the money be injected directly into banks.

Senator Inhofe has slammed the secrecy surrounding the destination of the bailout money, saying that Hank Paulson could have given it to his friends and that the “blank check” must be cancelled now.

Inhofe is now trying to rally support for a freeze on what’s left of the initial $350 billion of bailout money with his “roll back the bailout” proposal, which will also require an affirmative vote on the part of Congress to approve Treasury’s plan for the remaining $350 billion.

http://nationalexpositor.com/News/1502.html




www.stock-market-lessons.com
zigzagman
Posted: Monday, November 24, 2008 2:29:14 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 8/14/2008
Posts: 314
Location: Memphis

Federal Reserve and Treasury Offer Half of US GDP to the Wall Street Banks:

24 November 2008



Our motto used to be "millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute."

That has changed to "Trillions for the banks, but a few dollars loaned at interest for the real economy."

Hey there all you big strong men,
Time to serve your Uncle Ben,
Don't give up, you must be bold,
Get out there and short some gold.
The Treasury's stash is almost dry,
Oops, the Buck is going to die.

And its one, two, three who are we working for,
Hey hey we know who to thank,
So give your all to Uncle Hank.
And its five, six, seven, don't you dare be late,
Well, there ain't no time to ask them why,
But the Buck is gonna die.


Fed Pledges Top $7.4 Trillion to Ease Frozen Credit:

By Mark Pittman and Bob Ivry

Nov. 24 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. government is prepared to lend more than $7.4 trillion on behalf of American taxpayers, or half the value of everything produced in the nation last year, to rescue the financial system since the credit markets seized up 15 months ago. (But there is no money for Social Security, for Medical programs, for real industry, for people - Jesse)

The unprecedented pledge of funds includes $2.8 trillion already tapped by financial institutions in the biggest response to an economic emergency since the New Deal of the 1930s, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. The commitment dwarfs the only plan approved by lawmakers, the Treasury Department’s $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program. Federal Reserve lending last week was 1,900 times the weekly average for the three years before the crisis. (This isn't the New Deal, its the Raw Deal for the people and the Sweet Deal for the banks that caused our problems through their reckless greed - Jesse)

When Congress approved the TARP on Oct. 3, Fed Chairman Ben S. Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson acknowledged the need for transparency and oversight. Now, as regulators commit far more money while refusing to disclose loan recipients or reveal the collateral they are taking in return, some Congress members are calling for the Fed to be reined in. (That's nothing compared to what the public is calling to be done to the Fed and the Bush Treasury - Jesse)

“Whether it’s lending or spending, it’s tax dollars that are going out the window and we end up holding collateral we don’t know anything about,” said Congressman Scott Garrett, a New Jersey Republican who serves on the House Financial Services Committee. “The time has come that we consider what sort of limitations we should be placing on the Fed so that authority returns to elected officials as opposed to appointed ones...”

‘Snookered’

Regulators hope the rescue will contain the damage and keep banks providing the credit that is the lifeblood of the U.S. economy.

Most of the spending programs are run out of the New York Fed, whose president, Timothy Geithner, is said to be President- elect Barack Obama’s choice to be Treasury Secretary.

The money that’s been pledged is equivalent to $24,000 for every man, woman and child in the country. It’s nine times what the U.S. has spent so far on wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to Congressional Budget Office figures. It could pay off more than half the country’s mortgages.

“It’s unprecedented,” said Bob Eisenbeis, chief monetary economist at Vineland, New Jersey-based Cumberland Advisors Inc. and an economist for the Atlanta Fed for 10 years until January. “The backlash has begun already. Congress is taking a lot of hits from their constituents because they got snookered on the TARP big time. There’s a lot of supposedly smart people who look to be totally incompetent and it’s all going to fall on the taxpayer...”

$4.4 Trillion

Bernanke’s Fed is responsible for $4.4 trillion of pledges, or 60 percent of the total commitment of $7.4 trillion, based on data compiled by Bloomberg concerning U.S. bailout steps started a year ago.

“Too often the public is focused on the wrong piece of that number, the $700 billion that Congress approved,” said J.D. Foster, a former staff member of the Council of Economic Advisers who is now a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation in Washington. “The other areas are quite a bit larger.”

The Fed’s rescue attempts began last December with the creation of the Term Auction Facility to allow lending to dealers for collateral. After Bear Stearns’s collapse in March, the central bank started making direct loans to securities firms at the same discount rate it charges commercial banks, which take customer deposits.

In the three years before the crisis, such average weekly borrowing by banks was $48 million, according to the central bank. Last week it was $91.5 billion.

Lehman Failure

The failure of a second securities firm, Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., in September, led to the creation of the Commercial Paper Funding Facility and the Money Market Investor Funding Facility, or MMIFF. The two programs, which have pledged $2.3 trillion, are designed to restore calm in the money markets, which deal in certificates of deposit, commercial paper and Treasury bills.

“Money markets seized up after Lehman failed,” said Neal Soss, chief economist at Credit Suisse Group in New York and a former aide to Fed chief Paul Volcker. “Lehman failing made a lot of subsequent actions necessary.”

The FDIC, chaired by Sheila Bair, is contributing 20 percent of total rescue commitments. The FDIC’s $1.4 trillion in guarantees will amount to a bank subsidy of as much as $54 billion over three years, or $18 billion a year, because borrowers will pay a lower interest rate than they would on the open market, according to Raghu Sundurum and Viral Acharya of New York University and the London Business School.

Bank Subsidy

Congress and the Treasury have ponied up $892 billion in TARP and other funding, or 12 percent.

The Federal Housing Administration, overseen by Department of Housing and Urban Development Secretary Steven Preston, was given the authority to guarantee $300 billion of mortgages, or about 4 percent of the total commitment, with its Hope for Homeowners program, designed to keep distressed borrowers from foreclosure.

Most of the federal guarantees reduce interest rates on loans to banks and securities firms, which would create a subsidy of at least $6.6 billion annually for the financial industry, according to data compiled by Bloomberg comparing rates charged by the Fed against market interest currently paid by banks.

Not included in the calculation of pledged funds is an FDIC proposal to prevent foreclosures by guaranteeing modifications on $444 billion in mortgages at an expected cost of $24.4 billion to be paid from the TARP, according to FDIC spokesman David Barr. The Treasury Department hasn’t approved the program.

Automakers

Bernanke and Paulson, former chief executive officer of Goldman Sachs, have also promised as much as $200 billion to shore up nationalized mortgage finance companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The FDIC arranged for $139 billion in loan guarantees for General Electric Co.’s finance unit.

The tally doesn’t include money to General Motors Corp., Ford Motor Co. and Chrysler LLC. Obama has said he favors financial assistance to keep them from collapse.

Paulson told the House Financial Services Committee Nov. 18 that the $250 billion already allocated to banks through the TARP is an investment, not an expenditure.

“I think it would be extraordinarily unusual if the government did not get that money back and more,” Paulson said.

‘We Haircut It’

In his Nov. 18 testimony, Bernanke told the House Financial Services Committee that the central bank wouldn’t lose money.

“We take collateral, we haircut it, it is a short-term loan, it is very safe, we have never lost a penny in these various lending programs,” he said.

A haircut refers to the practice of lending less money than the collateral’s current market value.

Requiring the Fed to disclose loan recipients might set off panic, said David Tobin, principal of New York-based loan-sale consultants and investment bank Mission Capital Advisors LLC.

“If you mark to market today, the banking system is bankrupt,” Tobin said. “So what do you do? You try to keep it going as best you can.” (Please take note holders of dollars and Treasuries. If the banking system is bankrupt, guess what is next - Jesse)

“Mark to market” means adjusting the value of an asset, such as a mortgage-backed security, to reflect current prices.

Posted by Jesse at 8:55 AM

http://jessescrossroadscafe.blogspot.com/2008/11/federal-reserve-and-treasury-offer-half.html




www.stock-market-lessons.com
zigzagman
Posted: Monday, December 22, 2008 3:15:18 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 8/14/2008
Posts: 314
Location: Memphis

Where'd the bailout money go? Shhhh, it's a secret

Monday December 22, 7:08 am ET
By Matt Apuzzo, Associated Press Writer

Where'd the bailout money go? $350 billion later, banks won't say how they're spending it

WASHINGTON (AP) -- It's something any bank would demand to know before handing out a loan: Where's the money going?
But after receiving billions in aid from U.S. taxpayers, the nation's largest banks say they can't track exactly how they're spending the money or they simply refuse to discuss it.

"We've lent some of it. We've not lent some of it. We've not given any accounting of, 'Here's how we're doing it,'" said Thomas Kelly, a spokesman for JPMorgan Chase, which received $25 billion in emergency bailout money. "We have not disclosed that to the public. We're declining to."

The Associated Press contacted 21 banks that received at least $1 billion in government money and asked four questions: How much has been spent? What was it spent on? How much is being held in savings, and what's the plan for the rest?

None of the banks provided specific answers.

"We're not providing dollar-in, dollar-out tracking," said Barry Koling, a spokesman for Atlanta, Ga.-based SunTrust Banks Inc., which got $3.5 billion in taxpayer dollars.

Some banks said they simply didn't know where the money was going.

"We manage our capital in its aggregate," said Regions Financial Corp. spokesman Tim Deighton, who said the Birmingham, Ala.-based company is not tracking how it is spending the $3.5 billion it received as part of the financial bailout.

The answers highlight the secrecy surrounding the Troubled Assets Relief Program, which earmarked $700 billion -- about the size of the Netherlands' economy -- to help rescue the financial industry. The Treasury Department has been using the money to buy stock in U.S. banks, hoping that the sudden inflow of cash will get banks to start lending money.

There has been no accounting of how banks spend that money. Lawmakers summoned bank executives to Capitol Hill last month and implored them to lend the money -- not to hoard it or spend it on corporate bonuses, junkets or to buy other banks. But there is no process in place to make sure that's happening and there are no consequences for banks who don't comply.

"It is entirely appropriate for the American people to know how their taxpayer dollars are being spent in private industry," said Elizabeth Warren, the top congressional watchdog overseeing the financial bailout.

But, at least for now, there's no way for taxpayers to find that out.

Pressured by the Bush administration to approve the money quickly, Congress attached nearly no strings on the $700 billion bailout in October. And the Treasury Department, which doles out the money, never asked banks how it would be spent.

"Those are legitimate questions that should have been asked on Day One," said Rep. Scott Garrett, R-N.J., a House Financial Services Committee member who opposed the bailout as it was rushed through Congress. "Where is the money going to go to? How is it going to be spent? When are we going to get a record on it?"

Nearly every bank AP questioned -- including Citibank and Bank of America, two of the largest recipients of bailout money -- responded with generic public relations statements explaining that the money was being used to strengthen balance sheets and continue making loans to ease the credit crisis.

A few banks described company-specific programs, such as JPMorgan Chase's plan to lend $5 billion to nonprofit and health care companies next year. Richard Becker, senior vice president of Wisconsin-based Marshall & Ilsley Corp., said the $1.75 billion in bailout money allowed the bank to temporarily stop foreclosing on homes.

But no bank provided even the most basic accounting for the federal money.

"We're choosing not to disclose that," said Kevin Heine, spokesman for Bank of New York Mellon, which received about $3 billion.

Others said the money couldn't be tracked. Bob Denham, a spokesman for North Carolina-based BB&T Corp., said the bailout money "doesn't have its own bucket." But he said taxpayer money wasn't used in the bank's recent purchase of a Florida insurance company. Asked how he could be sure, since the money wasn't being tracked, Denham said the bank would have made that deal regardless.

Others, such as Morgan Stanley spokeswoman Carissa Ramirez, offered to discuss the matter with reporters on condition of anonymity. When AP refused, Ramirez sent an e-mail saying: "We are going to decline to comment on your story."

Most banks wouldn't say why they were keeping the details secret.

"We're not sharing any other details. We're just not at this time," said Wendy Walker, a spokeswoman for Dallas-based Comerica Inc., which received $2.25 billion from the government.

Heine, the New York Mellon Corp. spokesman who said he wouldn't share spending specifics, added: "I just would prefer if you wouldn't say that we're not going to discuss those details."

The banks which came closest to answering the questions were those, such as U.S. Bancorp and Huntington Bancshares Inc., that only recently received the money and have yet to spend it. But neither provided anything more than a generic summary of how the money would be spent.

Lawmakers say they want to tighten restrictions on the remaining, yet-to-be-released $350 billion block of bailout money before more cash is handed out. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson said the department is trying to step up its monitoring of bank spending.

"What we've been doing here is moving, I think, with lightning speed to put necessary programs in place, to develop them, implement them, and then we need to monitor them while we're doing this," Paulson said at a recent forum in New York. "So we're building this organization as we're going."

Warren, the congressional watchdog appointed by Democrats, said her oversight panel will try to force the banks to say where they've spent the money.

"It would take a lot of nerve not to give answers," she said.

But Warren said she's surprised she even has to ask.

"If the appropriate restrictions were put on the money to begin with, if the appropriate transparency was in place, then we wouldn't be in a position where you're trying to call every recipient and get the basic information that should already be in public documents," she said.

Garrett, the New Jersey congressman, said the nation might never get a clear answer on where hundreds of billions of dollars went.

"A year or two ago, when we talked about spending $100 million for a bridge to nowhere, that was considered a scandal," he said.

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/081222/meltdown_secrets.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Will YOU Tolerate A $700 Billion THEFT? by Karl Denninger

Monday, December 22. 2008
Posted at 07:30

Will YOU Tolerate A $700 Billion THEFT?

It really is rather simple: (see above article)

WASHINGTON (AP) -- It's something any bank would demand to know before handing out a loan: Where's the money going?

But after receiving billions in aid from U.S. taxpayers, the nation's largest banks say they can't track exactly how they're spending the money or they simply refuse to discuss it.

"We've lent some of it. We've not lent some of it. We've not given any accounting of, 'Here's how we're doing it,'" said Thomas Kelly, a spokesman for JPMorgan Chase, which received $25 billion in emergency bailout money. "We have not disclosed that to the public. We're declining to."

The Associated Press contacted 21 banks that received at least $1 billion in government money and asked four questions: How much has been spent? What was it spent on? How much is being held in savings, and what's the plan for the rest?

None of the banks provided specific answers.

So you've had all this money stolen, orchestrated by Congress and the US Treasury, and the thieves took it in plain sight and are now refusing to tell you where it went.

America, do you intend to sit for this?

Why are there not 500,000 Americans in Washington DC right here and now, in the streets, shutting that town down and refusing to leave until and unless every penny of the money stolen is returned - and both Paulson and Bernanke are run out of town on a rail?

After all, the banks have all admitted they didn't do what was intended by Congress with the money and are refusing to tell us where it went!

Here's a list of famous people who have engaged in a given activity over the years (from Wikipedia, natch):

Adam Worth
Ma Barker
Naomi Betts
Bonnie Parker, of Bonnie and Clyde
Clyde Barrow, of Bonnie and Clyde
Butch Cassidy
Harry Longabaugh, known as "The Sundance Kid"
Emmett Dalton, principle of the Dalton Gang, 1890s
William Daddano Sr.
John Dillinger
Bill Doolin, 1890s
Charles Arthur "Pretty Boy" Floyd
Frank James, one of the two James Brothers
Jesse James, the other member of the James Brothers pair
Patty Hearst
J.L. Hunter
The Reno Gang
James-Younger gang, 1866 -1881
Alvin Karpis
Tom Ketchum
McCanles gang, 1861
Midwest Bank Robbers, 1990s
Emil Matasareanu, 1997
Larry Eugene Phillips, Jr., 1997
Bugs Moran
George "Baby Face" Nelson
Albert Frederick Nussbaum
Joseph "Specs" O'Keefe
Symbionese Liberation Army, James Kilgore
Mutulu Shakur
Luke Elliott Sommer
Henry Starr
Willie "The Actor" Sutton
Bobby Randell Wilcoxson
John Wojtowicz
Candice Rose Martinez, "The Cell Phone Bandit"

You figure out what they were best known for and whether Ben
Bernanke and Henry Paulson should be added to the list.

http://market-ticker.denninger.net/archives/696-Will-YOU-Tolerate-A-700-Billion-THEFT.html




www.stock-market-lessons.com
Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS

YAFPro Theme Created by Jaben Cargman (Tiny Gecko)
Powered by Yet Another Forum.net version 1.9.1.8 (NET v2.0) - 3/29/2008
Copyright © 2003-2008 Yet Another Forum.net. All rights reserved.