Who wrote the draft?
Posted on 09/27/2008 9:26:16 AM PDT by frithguild
At its very foundation, every document has a drafter. Likewise, every document has a first draft. When was the first draft of the present Treasury Bailout Plan created? Some have said it has been in existence for more than a year.
Who is the grunt that actually wrote it? Did anyone from Goldman Sachs, Henry Paulsen's former firm, or any other Wall Street firm, render any advice about it?
Now look at campaign contributions to the Democrat Party by Wall Street. A campaign contribution is deemed under the law to be speech. What are they saying - something about getting $700 billion?
Hey wait a minute - I thought the Democrat Party was the party of the little guy?
What I am getting at is this - I think that proving the Treasury Bailout Plan has been in the works for more than a year is a devastating fact, if it can be proved. Would like astute Freeper assistance.
Well, Barney Frank obviously drafted stuff like the housing handout (I don't know if this is the ACORN provision or what, I think it might be)...this was not Paulson's idea. Frank/Dodd added things to the basic Paulson plan.
Latest I heard is that this housing part is being shelved to be considered in a separate bill. Good.
Never met a consultant who could actually write a full regulation (or law). All they can do is “edit”, and anybody can do that.
Right - Obama owns the present plan, which is wildly unpopular, according to polling data. Paulsen's staff drafted the bailout how long ago? The street has been talking about thd bailout for far longer than John Q. Public has known. Guarantee there was leakage from Treasury about the details of the plan. Contributions then flow to he who the street thinks will be best of execute the plan that benefits them best.
So how long has Treasury had this plan in the works? Shouldn't the public know?
Who wrote the draft?
Those two have been dead man walking for a long time. So no smoke there. Besides - they are not "Wall Street" The trick here is to look at the history of the bailout, and tie it more tightly to "Wall Street," which has forseen its destruction and engineered a way to get 700 billion. The question is how long have they known.
How many months? How much has rolled in fromm Wall Street to Obama/Frank/Dodd in that general time?
True, and the plan was to let them go on walking for awhile longer but Paulson cut them dead with one swipe, despite Barney Frank's squeals.
Good for Paulson.
It is the "when" that I a focusing on here. How long have they known what they will do?
To get closer to ‘when’ and ‘who’:
“Follow the money”
No one seems to realize that this 700 Billion isn't going to support Goldman and the "rich fat cats", it's going to support the customers of the banks, whose money has already been loaned out (at congressional insistence) to people who can't pay their mortgages.
There is really no incentive for them to have planned something like this ahead of time. You're clutching at straws counselor.
This long?:
Bush unveils sub-prime bail-out plan to threats of legal action
By Stephen Foley in New York
Friday, 7 December 2007
Listening to Sen Thune just now on FOX - very discouraging.
He’s hemming and hawing- but the bottom line is- the GOP House guys aren’t getting changes made by the Dems- Thune says some GOP House will sign on- but not many.
There are even "implementing regulations" that've been drafted and subjected to preliminary review ~ but I'd suspect they're not older than6 months. Right now they are cleaning them up to meld with what looks like the "final" legislative proposal. Some staffer will have the job of tracking changes in the legislation as it's butchered/crafted, and making preliminary changes to the implementing/regulatory rules.
With modern computer systems they can probably stick this stuff together in under a week.
We regularly incorporated new postal rate schedules and rules into the existing rules in 2 or 3 days (with allnighters) and had them out for the 10 day period of notice and comment before the big mailers were aware that they would have to "pay up" sooner than they thought.
I suspect the Treasury guys are as good, as are their counterparts on the committee staffs in Congress.
I used to make 3 or 4 different versions of a proposed rule change and just lay them out on my desk so the corporate spies could come around and get confused ~ I suspect the Treasury and committee staff guys do the same thing. We will be hearing "surprise findings" as this progresses, with instant denials of "That's not in there".
Could be a lot of fun. Insofar as is possible I'll try to give an "insiders view" of apparant problems in drafting law and rules as this proceeds. Some of it's going to be beyond my understanding, but the process of drafting, reviewing, and so forth is fairly cut and dried.
Maybe - but...
If it is not the Paulsen plan, what is the alternative plan? Insurance for CDO's or some other arrangement that more clearly idenfies the moral hazard? Regardless of what the alternative is, the Wall Street money has broken for Obama/Frank/Dodd for some time. What are they "saying" with those contributions?
I don't think it says anything about them that it doesn't say about other liberals.
They can pay. They don't care to.
Most of 'em used to be honest people.
This later class borrowed far more money for far better homes in much nicer neighborhoods. Among other things you never suspect that they keep dogs in cages on the back porch for either eating or hunting.
These guys are far more dangerous to us than the others ~ and a rough computation of the risk posed by the poor and the illegal aliens comes up under $100 billion. That's barely 15% of the total risk and it assumes the illegals never eat.
“How many months? How much has rolled in fromm Wall Street to Obama/Frank/Dodd in that general time?”
And where did the money go that they just received in JULY?
The "landscape" we are dealing with here is that the MSM shapes perceptions. They have done nothing about CRA requirement to write mortgages for people who were unlikely to pay them back; Nothing about F & F's bad mortgage paper meeting political requirements but not fiduciary ones and their wholesale accountung fraud. So now it just doesn't ring true that 700 billion is in the mortgages that have never been written, and not in some undeserving rich guy's pocket. Right or wrong, that is how it is seen by most voters.
I'll take it as a true for a moment that Wall Streeters donate Democrat because they are Northeastern Liberals and for no other reason. Do you think you can sell that to MSM steeped Regan Democrats? Tough sell, you must admit, because it just does not cover 100% of the situations. So I don't buy it.
Now what about pointing out Wall Street contributions to Obama/Dodd/Frank may be linked temporally with "Wall Street's" perception of an impending intervention." The soundbite I am looking for is "They have known about this since ."
So - How does the Obama campaign undo this without causing itself further damage?
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.