Posted on 09/29/2008 3:17:03 AM PDT by SE Mom
On Friday, September 19, rank and file Republican members of Congress were notified of a conference call that would include Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, and Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke. I would never disclose confidences, but it is quite public now that we were told an economic disaster was about to take this country that could be worse than the crash of 1929.
Now, that’s a real attention-getter. It sure got mine.
My years as a judge force me to demand factual evidence to support expert opinions. The factual evidence was then and is now less than satisfactory. Yes, credit was becoming a real problem. Yes, there were major banks in trouble, but those were investment bankers, not the bedrock community bankers who for the most part have done fairly well since the 1980's about having better security for their loans. (It is also public record that I did outside counsel work back in the 80's for both the FDIC and the RTC, so I was familiar with problems then, and telltale signs of problems now.)
It was clear to Secretary Paulson that something had to be done immediately so that we could pass it on Monday or Tuesday at the latest to inject $700 billion into the banking system. That would be done by having the federal government purchase mortgage backed securities from the ailing big-boy-banks.
...
I’ve not been in Washington all that long but one adage I’ve learned is that, “No matter how cynical you get, it is never enough to catch up.”
(Excerpt) Read more at humanevents.com ...
Unbelievable ping!
The reality is that DEMOCRATS SAW IT AS A VOTE-GETTING OPPORTUNITY.
~snip~
As the great Robert Novak reported in October 2007, “…the former Goldman Sachs CEO does not act or sound much like a conservative Republican to the GOP remnant at the Treasury. “It’s not in Hank Paulson’s DNA,” one official told me. Is he loyal to Bush? “Hank is for Hank,” he replied.”
...
Secretary Paulson had said that it might take 10-20 years to hold the assets before they achieved their appropriate value. Only the federal government had the patience, America was told, to manage these assets correctly! The federal government can’t even keep the same tax incentives in place for 2 years in a row. Congress often changes its mind and so do administrations. Why should we believe this is going to work?
~snip~
Very interesitng...thanks for posting.
“After the meeting in the White House with the Presidential candidates, it was reported falsely that there was - before the meeting - a basic deal. Those reports were obviously contrived so the Democrats could say Sen. John McCain blew it up by coming back. There was no deal. The reports of the early deal were just as truthful as when Rep. Barnie Frank said a few years ago that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were solid and we didn’t need reforms nor did we need to worry. He was wrong then too.
What was not initially reported is that everyone spoke at the meeting. When it was McCain’s turn last, everyone anticipated him reaching across the aisle so he could claim he was a peace-maker and got a deal, no matter how bad it was for conservatives or American in general.
All the reports I heard said that the meeting broke down with loud yelling and that McCain never really said much during the whole meeting. That is true, but what he did say was that the “...House Republicans are right on this one.”
All heck broke loose! The Democrats expected him to be political; not principled. How could he disappoint them? But McCain did disappoint: the Democrats, not the Republicans.”
***
Of course, the most important words in that passage are a microcosm of how the Fifth Column is trying to throw the election: “IT WAS REPORTED FALSELY.”
If Bush is so smart how come he's falling for this?
~~snip~~
As the great Robert Novak reported in October 2007, “…the former Goldman Sachs CEO does not act or sound much like a conservative Republican to the GOP remnant at the Treasury. “It’s not in Hank Paulson’s DNA,” one official told me. Is he loyal to Bush? “Hank is for Hank,” he replied.”
Secretary Paulson had said that it might take 10-20 years to hold the assets before they achieved their appropriate value. Only the federal government had the patience, America was told, to manage these assets correctly! The federal government can’t even keep the same tax incentives in place for 2 years in a row. Congress often changes its mind and so do administrations. Why should we believe this is going to work?
~~snip~~
After the meeting in the White House with the Presidential candidates, it was reported falsely that there was - before the meeting - a basic deal. Those reports were obviously contrived so the Democrats could say Sen. John McCain blew it up by coming back. There was no deal. The reports of the early deal were just as truthful as when Rep. Barnie Frank said a few years ago that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were solid and we didn’t need reforms nor did we need to worry. He was wrong then too.
What was not initially reported is that everyone spoke at the meeting. When it was McCain’s turn last, everyone anticipated him reaching across the aisle so he could claim he was a peace-maker and got a deal, no matter how bad it was for conservatives or American in general.
All the reports I heard said that the meeting broke down with loud yelling and that McCain never really said much during the whole meeting. That is true, but what he did say was that the “...House Republicans are right on this one.”
All heck broke loose! The Democrats expected him to be political; not principled. How could he disappoint them? But McCain did disappoint: the Democrats, not the Republicans.
~~snip~~
OK, I haven’t really discussed the President’s role in all of this. Understand: he is very smart; one of the wittiest, most likeable people you could ever be around. He suffers from a couple of problems. One is that he speaks like a Texan and, as Jeff Foxworthy says, “When people hear you have a southern accent, they immediately deduct 50 IQ points from how smart they think you are.”
President Bush just believes his friends would not ever manipulate him (at least he doesn’t until they write a book and prove that they would and did.) He believes what Sec. Paulson and his minions have told him. But it should be noted that after the President’s address on television, there were a number of us — led by Rep. Thad McCotter who believed we should be entitled to a Republican response.
So, there you have it. Pray for our nation. May God help us all.
~~end~~
Bush was rolled by Paulson and he and the Democrats just screwed us all.
Pray that the House Republicans continue standing on principle! Hang tough guys. Our freedom depends upon it!!
And the Republicans are rolling over for them!
I’ve diligently tried to inform myself about all the things at stake in this mess- I’m still confused- but several points stand out:
-The Treasury has been working on this for months- yet at the last minute when it appeared we were in a crisis- this socialist plan was the best they could do..
-Paulson can’t be trusted as an honest broker.
-The liberals are winning the PR war.
I think you may have nailed it, Jim.
-The liberals are winning the PR war.
they are winning because of the perception McCain is for the bailout.
“The liberals are winning the PR war.”
this is clearly the most disturbing factor underpinning the current campaigns, and many posts here in the past 24 hours reflect that the constant barrage is hurting morale.
There is a lot of wagging the dog going on, and the calls here for the dog to start biting back are justified.
The OverLords have spoken.
Bookmark for later.
I am not seeking a Treasury Secretary that is loyal to the president, any president.
I am seeking someone who speaks the truth, doesn’t spin the facts, and informs the citizens of exactly what is being proposed and how it is going to be overseen.
This entire crisis is something that has been coming for years and is a direct result of the effort by the democrats to 1st set up the financial markets and institutions to extend credit where it never should have been extended in the first place to make home ownership possible for people who could never afford it. And 2nd to transfer wealth in a massive way such that their sweetheart people and institutions benefited immensely who then repaid the politicians with campaign contributions and even positions when they left office...or positions to those who were close to those same politicians.
Now that it has failed, those same people were going to be made to benefit from it and we the people (as a part of the transfer of wealth and marxistic desires pf those who crafted this whole mess) are going to be put on the line.
...and when you look hard at it, you find that Barack Hussein Obama is up to his eye brows in the entire scheme.
The vast majority of elected pols are both "for" and "against" on this one. They support it reluctantly, because (they claim - echoing the administration's warning of dire consequences) if they don't pass something agreeable to Secretary Paulson, there will be an economic meltdown within days or weeks.
McCain is in the group that is "reluctantly in agreement" with Paulson. So is Obama. On this particular vote, the two are indistinguishable.
that’s what happens when you listen to ‘experts’ instead of markets
Congress to the American public: Screw you.
Isn’t THAT the truth?
How true!
'But McCain did disappoint: the Democrats, not the Republicans.'
I like this part.
I think the President expects people to be as 'non-partisan' as he tries to be. He has said that he is the President of all of the people. I wonder what he will say this morning.
Bump (for a later read).
WaMu CEO Alan Fishman Gets $18 Million Golden ParachuteAlan H. Fishman, the CEO of Washington Mutual, will likely be unemployed after only a few weeks on the job. But don't cry for Fishman. He's set to walk away with about $18 million in bonuses after his three week stint at the failed savings and loan giant. His "golden parachute" is raising eyebrows, particularly because of his short tenure at WaMu. Washington Mutual was the nation's largest savings and loan. It was taken over Thursday night by federal bank regulators and then sold to JP Morgan Chase for $1.9 billion. This, as lawmakers continued to work on a $700 billion bailout for bad debt in the financial industry. According to the Securities and Exchange Commission, Washington Mutual gave Fishman a $7.5 million bonus when it hired him on Sept. 8, and guaranteed him $11.6 million in severance if he was terminated, the so-called "golden parachute" that has created controversy when failed executives walk with huge rewards. Fishman also was eligible for annual bonuses of up to 365 percent of his annual base pay of $1 million
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1066149/wamu_ceo_alan_fishman_gets_18_million.html
We’ve also been told that the Republican leaders are trying to convince members who are retiring to vote since the fall-out won’t matter to them personally.
What about voting your conscience.
:) "House Republicans are right on this one"
Principled indeed!
“-The Treasury has been working on this for months- yet at the last minute when it appeared we were in a crisis- this socialist plan was the best they could do..
-Paulson can’t be trusted as an honest broker.
-The liberals are winning the PR war.”
And what about Bernanke?
The man is no slouch.
I believe Bernanke is telling the truth.
Not that I think the dems are capable of coming up with something without ruining it...but clearly something has to be done.
It is Bernanke’s opinion that in the Great Depression the Fed make a terrible mistake by allowing banks to fail (although Feds hands were somewhat tied back then).
So the premise is - how to prevent the banking system from collapsing?
All heck broke loose! The Democrats expected him to be political; not principled. How could he disappoint them? But McCain did disappoint: the Democrats, not the Republicans.
If this is true, and I have no reason to dispute it, I have new found respect for McCain. Although, it does say "all the reports I've heard" and not first hand knowledge.
I know- though I did read another account that jives with this one. I can’t cite the source though- I’ve read too much this week!
ping-a-ling
One thing that has started to evolve in my understanding is that this crisis is more about declining home values than mortgage defaults. Mortgage defaults are somewhere in the 5% and $250B range. There are many times more the losses in values of mortgage backed securities that are not yet in default. So, we know what has unraveled so far. What goes next as the bubble deflates?
With those questions in mind, Paulson made a few billion during the creation of this bubble as CEO of Goldman Sachs. Where is that money now? What conflicts of interest might he be serving? Any coincidence that Buffet ponied up $5B in Goldman Sachs? What might he know about what Paulson plans to do with the $700B? With only four months left to serve, will Paulson blow the whole wad in that time?
This stinks like last weeks fish to me.
I wish Pres. Bush had impanelled a Blue Ribbon commission comprised of unbiased economists and others financial gurus (Forbes) to suggest legislation. No members of Congress included! And had done it IN PUBLIC rather than allow those responsible for the mess in the first place and who had already benefited from Fannie and Freddie via special deals and campaign contributions try to fix it in secret BEHIND CLOSED DOORS and with a 6:2 advantage. Where’s the equal representation?
Americans must DEMAND an investigation of all of this.
Here’s a concept—
What about voting in the best interest of your constituents?!
I hope my comments didn’t suggest any support at all for Paulson. SEC chairman Cox ought to resign and take Paulson with him.
Then we must begin cleaning house and senate. Sadly, the dem voters love their corrupt politicians.
It is only a national crisis because Washington has gotten involved. Water is pouring through the hull, via holes they created by law, and they figure they can ease the flow of those leaks by poking other holes.
Far as I’m concerned they are all criminally incompetent.
I'm not usually given to conspiracy theories, but I can't help thinking that this entire "crisis" wasn't somehow timed to happen just now--kind of an early October surprise.
Not at all. The word loyalty caught my eye. Paulson is one of the principles that cooked up this whole leveraged hedge fund stuff and made a few billion on the ride up. I am questioning his loyalties. Are they to the US or Goldman Sachs based on what he knows will happen next?
That would have been a good idea. Having Dodd and fwank involved is ridiculous!
I have no doubt his loyalties lie with Goldman Sachs.
Just heard Governor Corzine, forced out of Goldman Sachs by Paulson. (ironic, isn’t it) praising Paulson and insisting he has no vested interest in Goldman Sachs.
What a joke, this man’s entire severance of many millions of dollars is in GS stock.
That said, I understand that there is a crisis in the financial world. This may be the solution, but most of us are so cynical we don’t trust anyone to tell us the truth.
The example you cite isn’t part of the bailout. Yes a failed bank was briefly taken over by the Feds but then immediately sold to another bank and this wasn’t in any way, shape or form part of the bailout we are discussing.
So as odious and crazy as it is that this Fishman guy left with all this dough from a severance package when he’d only been there 3 weeks, what would you have the Fed government do about it? Write and pass even more legislation trying to regulate the pay of CEO’s? Get even more deeply involved in trying to control every aspect of what once was a thriving private economy, even with its warts?
I say no.
They have the perception because McCain has NOT said anything publicly, and let 0bama takes all the credit. He seemed to reject it at first, but now he seems to accept it. Nothing directly from him, though.
he needs to show leadership. take a clear stand. do the right thing
ping
Bookmark for later
Someone please explain to me - how will shares of sold assett go to the tax payer or worded by others, ‘when assets sold, the benefits will go to the tax payers’? Exactly how will the sold assets go to the tax payer? Sounds like a bunch of mumbo jumbo gibberish vague talk to me.
Right on the money (no pun intended). The home prices were trending down to where they could be affordable without need of government programs and you can't have the market determine prices or we wouldn't need to rely on the government and hand over $$$ to folks like Paulson and Raines, etc. Something had to be done, and like a good little socialist-minded President, Bush went along.
You hit on one key. Who will govern to whom those assets are sold?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.