Replies

Since we know that one cannot prove a negative I'm asking for affirmative proof. Namely some documented evidence that there is such a program.

And I am asking you to name, specify, delineate precisely what pieces of evidence would satisfy your notion of proof. I can tell you in advance, I will not be able to supply a paper trade confirmation from the CME with Tim Geithner's or Hank Paulsen's or Alan Greenspan's name nor fingerprint residue.

Surely you realize how ridiculous it is to state that there is "no question" that a conspiracy exists when there is not a shred of hard evidence to back up the claim?

I don't consider that ridiculous especially considering I didn't call it a conspiracy. Surely you realize that the transcripts of FOMC meetings are sealed, by practice, for 3 weeks, and in some cases for years after they occur? We have no way of knowing what goes on in those meetings or if they are edited. The Fed has already violated its charter to the tune of trillions of dollars by buying unsecured debt, an act as contrary to the black letter law of its charter as it's possible to be.

Certain private operators with far smaller books and fewer employees could not manage to control information leakage on market-rigging schemes for very long without being caught dead to rights.

That line of reasoning escapes me. It is not the size of the book, it is the number of people involved and the "effect" they are trying to "cause". An individual broker or firm would "probably" have demonstratable confirms on both sides of a transaction; the buy, the sell. But not necessarily; they could buy the SPX and execute a hedge> sell on the e-minis. The Fed may not need to do so at all. If the Fed were to decide to intervene, it could be Timmy calling GS to pre-arrange them taking a big fat long off his hands (no record) moving his mouse (no record) buying the SPX futures (no obtainable record) and selling same (no obtainable record.

Quite simply, this alleged activity has been going on far too long, with too many folks directly involved and involving far too many counterparties to plausibly be a secret.

You are disparaging my lack of evidence by your characterization of how implausible the situation seems to you. You want my hard documentation against your "impression", and I think that's a lopsided request. Apart from a trade confirmation signed by Turbo Timmy, I'm just asking you to name the type of thing you are looking for. A letter on FRBNY letterhead? A copy of a FAX from Geithner to the CME? What? Just state what would constitute the evidence you're looking for. We have already seen and heard Ben Bernanke refuse to release the names of any bank or banks who utilizes the discount window, for fear that disclosing such info could start a run on any so-named bank. That's practically a quote from BB. A bank or other entity using the discount window is an event that I would guess occurs 100x as often as the PPT operates, maybe 300x. In 2009, we saw the Tsy, through the Fed, issue then repo bonds bearing the same CUSIP numbers in very rapid succession in transactions that absolutely reek of monetization, while Bernanke was literally on the witness stand stating that no such monetization was occurring or would occur. In 2008 we saw FNM and FRE paper that states on its face, on page 1, that the debt of FNm/FRE is explicitly NOT the debt of the US gov't converted explicitly to US gov't guaranteed debt.

We have seen the Fed undertake extraordinary actions, for example Maiden Lane I and 2, which would appear to permanently park hundreds of billions of dollars in rotten debt somewhere who knows where, maybe in some bank in the Bahamas, I don't know. NOBODY DOES except for a very few officers at the very top of Tsy and the Fed. That being my point.

Yet no one - in a scheme that spans decades, which would require enormous amounts of internal records, and which has involved thousands of individuals directly - has ever come forward to expose it?

Since Reagan explicitly and inarguably brought the PPT into existence as "the Working Group on Financial Markets" post 1987 I don't think it involves more than 200 people, all of whom are Fed governor level or higher. And it's not an ongoing scheme, at least as I conceive it. It is an impulsive activity in response to paniced market conditions that is unwound over time using proxies such as the primary dealer network and perhaps foreign banks. Or both.

The Fed has already violated its charter to the tune of trillions of dollars by buying unsecured debt, an act as contrary to the black letter law of its charter as it's possible to be.

Huh? Where is this charter, specifically the part that says they can't buy "unsecured debt"? Thanks.

Is Treasury debt "secured"?

The Fed has already violated its charter to the tune of trillions of dollars by buying unsecured debt, an act as contrary to the black letter law of its charter as it's possible to be.

Hey, I thought you never mentioned secured? LOL!