Fed Refuses to Disclose Recipients of $2 Trillion

[grassfed]

Source: Bloomberg

Dec. 12 (Bloomberg) -- The Federal Reserve refused a request to disclose the recipients of more than $2 trillion of emergency loans from U.S. taxpayers and the assets the central bank is accepting as collateral.

---

The Fed responded Dec. 8, saying it’s allowed to withhold internal memos as well as information about trade secrets and commercial information.

Read more: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=apx7XNLnZZlc&refer=home

[cap]

1. they are accepting mortgages as collateral

they just don't want to say so publicly.

[marketcrazy1]

2. the collateral is worth

WAY less than the 2 trillion they lent against it! and the banks that posted the most are bankrupt! ( and they DID say publicly that they were accepting mortgages as collateral, months ago! )

[cap]

6. yes.... it is a rather snarky bailout of the rich

[natrat]

3. sent to foreign countries and launderd into cayman accounts for 100 alex

[Greyhound]

4. Surprise! So Long, Suckers! n/t

[Romulox]

5. What happened to DU's Bailout Boosters??? Time to explain this away! nt

[TheKentuckian]

7. That 2T was FED hustle money. Taxation withour representation.

The bailout was the 750B to get credit moving.

[itsrobert]

8. Don't let facts get in the way of a good rant

I guess we have to hear the "I told ya so's" everyday for the next several years.

[Zynx]

9. That's not taxpayer money for the most part. We have no real claim on Fed assets.

That operates independently. This was a pretty poorly written article.

[Romulox]

10. The Fed's obligations are backed by "the full faith and credit of the US government"

They operate without oversight, but they have the power to obligate the US taxpayer nonetheless.

[kentuck]

11. How will we know how much we own of them??

We do own part of the banks, don't we? Did we not nationalize a big part of them?

[Romulox]

12. Nope. This was free money. And we STILL don't know how Citibank's CEO travels...

:shrug: