Bluggy and deformed - Obama and the Biggest Financial Players.

[truedelphi]

Great discussion over at Tinyrevolution.com about Ron Suskind and his book, "Confidence Men.".

Things are mentioned in is book that do not get much mention elsewhere, including this detailed and informative rap on how it went down between Obama and the bankers, Spring of 2009:


"The CEOs went into their traditional stance: "It's almost impossible to set caps; it's never worked, and you lose your best people," said one. "We're competing for talent on an international market," said another. Obama cut them off.

"Be careful how you make those statements, gentlemen. The public isn't buying that," Obama said. "My administration is the only thing between you and the pitchforks."
It was an attention grabber, no doubt, especially that carefully chosen last word.

But then Obama's flat tone turned to one of support, even sympathy. "You guys have an acute public relations problem that's turning into a political problem," he said. "And I want to help. But you need to show that you get that this is a crisis and that everyone has to make some sacrifices." According to one of the participants, he then said, "I'm not out there to go after you. I'm protecting you. But if I'm going to shield you from public and congressional anger, you have to give me something to work with on these issues of compensation."

Meanwhile, over at Naked Capitalist today, Mr Black from St Louis is saying that we the public should see to it that Eric Holder goes packing - as his DOJ is quite happy going after the small fry and totally avoiding the Bigger Fish swimming in the cesspool of life that we could refer to as our Financial Vampire Capitalists - get rid of "Venture" substitute vampires!

[truedelphi]

1. So how has it worked out? As far as the bankers go, the Obama Administration is no longer

Standing between the Big Financial Players and the public. So far, most at "Occupy everywhere" aren't getting into pitchforks. But the act of hundreds of thousands closing out there accounts was probably more effective in hurting the banks than ten thousand pitchforks would be.

And the actions would meet with the approval of Mr Ghandi himself.

So sad for you, Mr Bankers. The stake is going right into your vampirish lil hearts!

[phasma ex machina]

2. Obama needs to be on guard against the central banksters who made an example of Kennedy.

"On June 4, 1963, a virtually unknown Presidential decree, Executive Order 11110, was signed with the authority to basically strip the Bank of its power to loan money to the United States Federal Government at interest. With the stroke of a pen, President Kennedy declared that the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank would soon be out of business." (link)


"Gentlemen, I have had men watching you for a long time and I am convinced that you have used the funds of the bank to speculate in the breadstuffs of the country. When you won, you divided the profits amongst you, and when you lost, you charged it to the bank. You tell me that if I take the deposits from the bank and annul its charter, I shall ruin ten thousand families. That may be true, gentlemen, but that is your sin! Should I let you go on, you will ruin fifty thousand families, and that would be my sin! You are a den of vipers and thieves." - Andrew Jackson 1836

[PoliticAverse]

3. I keep a US Note from that period to show people there is currency other than Federal Reserve Notes

A specimen of one of the $2 notes issued during that period:

[truedelphi]

5. And Executive Order 11110 still stands. Although ignored, there is

absolutely no reason why any President not an employee of the Biggest Banks would not simply dust the law off and start putting it into use.

[JDPriestly]

4. There is a video of Bill Balck on this at Naked Capitalist.

He elaborates on precisely how the mortgage companies committed fraud -- by blacklisting honest appraisers and hiring dishonest ones.

I would say that is not the only way that the mortgage companies and lenders committed fraud on prospective borrowers.

In addition, I saw that mortgage company reps and lenders were jacking up the reported incomes of borrowers by claiming an additional one or two wage-earners as borrowers, as living in the homes whether they were or not.

In general, we should change our laws to impose some liability on the mortgage lender when that lender who is assumed to be an expert does not adequately vet prospective borrowers or warn borrowers about potential downsides to borrowing.

The law should impose a fiduciary duty on the mortgage lender if it doesn't already. Real estate agents in California do have a fiduciary duty, a duty of trust, to their clients. So they have an obligation to protect their clients' interests. Seems to me that would include making sure that a person really does qualify for the loan they need to receive for a given house.

Also, severe limits should be placed on the practice of co-signing.

[truedelphi]

6. Thanks for pointing that out. The video is well worth watching.

Though I do get the feeling that Mr Black seems to think that as soon as Obama "grasps" certain economic ideas, then he will change the direction of his Presidency.

I have assumed since the mooment that I heard Geithner would head Treasury that Obama totally understands economics, and he has chosen to embrace the philosophy of unregulated Socialism for the Financial Crowd, along with eternal Bailouts for The Banking crowd. And to hell with the consequences. (Since he lacks imagination, I don't think he foresaw people taking to the streets.)

[girl gone mad]

7. I agree that from the beginning they underestimated both the public's intelligence..

and our outrage over financial high crimes and bailouts.