Posted on 04/03/2008 9:22:59 AM PDT by TigerLikesRooster
April 3, 2008
Ben Bernanke admits Bear Stearns was hours from collapse
Dearbail Jordan
US Federal Reserve chairman, Ben Bernanke, today revealed that Bear Stearns was just one day away from going bust when the central bank stepped in to save the Wall Street bank to prevent chaos and a "severe" impact on confidence.
Speaking for a second day in front of US Congress, Mr Bernanke attempted to justify JP Morgan Chase's rescue of Bear Stearns, in a deal that included the US Fed agreeing to back $29 billion of the troubled investment bank's assets.
Mr Bernanke said: "... on March 13, Bear Stearns advised the Federal Reserve and other government agencies that its liquidity position had significantly deteriorated and that it would have to file for bankruptcy the next day unless alternative sources of funds became available."
The Fed chairman said that the central bank was forced to step in because the US financial system is "extremely complex and interconnected", and the collapse of Bear Stearns would have led to a "chaotic unwinding of positions in those markets are could have severely shaken confidence".
Mr Bernanke added: "Given the exceptional pressures on the global economy and financial system, the damage caused by a default by Bear Stearns could have been severe and extremely difficult to contain."
JP Morgan Chase agreed to acquire Bear Stearns for an initial $2 a share, valuing the lender at just $240 million. However, an investor outcry forced JP Morgan to increase the offer to $10 a share, as well as taking on $1 billion of Bear Stearns' assets with the remaining $29 billion backed by the US Fed.
Jamie Dimon, chief executive at JP Morgan, who was also appearing before Congress today, said the bank would not have offered to buy Bear Stearns if the Fed had not agreed to back the assets. His co-speaker, Alan Schwartz, chief executive at Bear Stearns, said today that the bank was not involved in negotiations between JP Morgan and the government regarding the $30 billion asset deal.
Mr Schwartz also maintained, as he said days before Bear Stearns nearly went bust last month, that the run that brought the lender to its knees was due to a lack of confidence and not because of a lack of capital or liquidity.
Mr Bernanke today reiterated his forecast that the US economy would slow in the first half before staging a recovery in the second half. However, like yesterday, Mr Bernanke refused to label the current economic situation as a recession.
It emerged today that US unemployment claims unexpectedly spiked last week by 38,000 to the highest rate since September 2005, alarming investors ahead of monthly jobless figures due out tomorrow.
New data revealed that the number of unemployment claims rose to 407,000 for the week ended March 29, above an expected 370,000 and the previous week's total of 369,000.
The sudden rise in benefit claims sent the Dow Jones industrial average down 48.6 points at 12,556.7 as investor grew nervous that today's figures are an indication of employment numbers that are due out tomorrow that are expected to show non-farm pay rolls for March have fallen by 60,000.
http://www.tickerforum.org/cgi-ticker/akcs-www?post=37889
Here’s what they did: http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/press/orders/orders20080401a1.pdf
Here’s why it was illegal:
The Constitution of the United States
Article I:
All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.
Article I, Section 7, Paragraph 1:
All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with amendments as on other Bills. (emphasis added)
Article I, Section 8, Paragraph 1:
The Congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excised, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States.... (emphasis added)
In addition, further EXCLUSIVE powers of Congress:
Article I, Section 8, Paragraph 2:
To have the power to borrow money on the credit of the United States
Article I, Section 8, Paragraph 5:
To coin money, regulate the value thereof....
Article I Section 9, Paragraph 7:
No money shall be drawn from the treasury, but in consequence of appropriations made by law; and a regular statement and account of receipts and expenditures of all public money shall be published from time to time.
Crossing the Rubicon (A Must Read!)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1996456/posts
Crossing the Rubicon
http://www.fpafunds.com/news_04022008_rubicon.asp
EXCERPT:
.....The Fed also resorted to a Depression-era clause, Article 13 (3) of the Federal Reserve Act that is to be used only in “unusual and exigent circumstances,” to deal with the Bear Stearns crisis. The Fed initially guaranteed $30 billion of Bear Stearns assets so that JPMorganChase could acquire the company for $2 per share. This is the first time since the Depression that the Fed will be taking brokerage firm collateral onto its balance sheet and placing itself at risk because of the excesses and unsound business practices of a brokerage firm. In an earlier era, Bear Stearns would have been left to fail. This is not the case today since there was apparently a deep fear on the part of the Fed that a failure of Bear Stearns could create a domino-like crisis infecting a wide array of financial institutions, thereby accelerating and deepening the current credit contagion. As Steven Romick said in our FPA partner meeting on March 21, “I’m more concerned about what I don’t see. Why is it that we are not being told about or seeing another bidder for Bear Stearns other than JPMorganChase? Might JPMorganChase be playing defense so as to protect its $91.7 trillion dollar derivative exposure (according to September 2007 Office of the Comptroller of the Currency data) that is supported by just $123 billion of equity? How much counter party exposure did JPMorganChase have to Bear Stearns?” In our opinion, the Bear Stearns transaction looks very suspicious. If the situation were so precarious, why shouldn’t shareholder ownership have been entirely wiped out because of the excesses and mismanagement by their firm? Why should the Fed’s balance sheet be placed at risk while shareholders are receiving some type of compensation? A week later, the bid was raised from $2 to $10 per share, increasing the value conveyed by approximately $1 billion. Again, why should there be any compensation to shareholders? This compensation is being conveyed to owners of a firm that had derivative positions, with notional amounts as of November 30, 2007, totaling $13.4 trillion. Warren Buffett has, on several occasions, described derivatives as potential “weapons of mass destruction.”....
Chapter and verse, please.
Put up or shut up.
Avalanches do not get prevented only delayed until they turn into spring floods. That’s just a phase change of the method of disaster.
Prove your own premise, do not expect to provide your legal education for nothing.
You can send the tuition money via Paypal and we can start tonight.
So then you'll need to prove that (a) the Fed took money from the Treasury AND (b) that it was not lawfully appropriated.
And I was discussing the value of the dollar before the Fed came along.
And for that matter, why do you call deflation "crushing" while inflation is not ?
A little bit of deflation is a lot worse than a little bit of inflation. Deflation is worse than inflation.
Sorry, creating money is not magic
I'm glad you agree it's not magic.
The BSC figures seem to be 13 trillion
13 trillion what?
Fed Invokes Depression-Era Law for Bear Loan
Four Federal Reserve governors voted unanimously to approve a 28-day secured Fed loan facility to Bear Stearns Friday using a rarely used Depression-era provision of the Federal Reserve Act that normally requires five governors’ approval, Fed officials said.Except, within the letter from Paulson, it states:The Fed normally has seven governors but two seats are currently vacant and one governor was traveling and unavailable to vote.
Officials said while the loan is being made via J.P. Morgan Chase, the risk is being borne by the Fed. That means if Bear Stearns fails and the collateral is insufficient to repay the loan, the Fed would incur a loss.
* * *
Under Section 13-3 of the Federal Reserve Act, added in 1932, it can lend to "individuals, partnerships, or corporations" with the approval of not less than five governors, provided "such individual, partnership, or corporation is unable to secure adequate credit accommodations from other banking institutions."
However, under Section 11(r)(3)(ii)(I), approval can be granted with fewer than five governors in office if the “available members unanimously determine that … unusual and exigent circumstances exist and the borrower is unable to secure adequate credit accommodations from other sources” and “despite the use of all means available (including all available telephonic, telegraphic, and other electronic means), the other members of the Board have not been able to be contacted on the matter.”
"...and acknowledge that if any losses arise out of the special facility extended by the FRBNY to JPMCB, the loss will be treated by the FRBNY as an expense that may reduce the net earnings transfered by the FRBNY to the Treasury general fund."
And see:
Treasury Agrees to Absorb any Losses to the Fed from Bear Stearns
Video from CNBC (hat tip idoc)And...did JP Morgan and/or Bear Stearns seek to use CREDIT PREVIOUSLY EXTENDED TO IT? The Fed should prove that neither BEAR STEARNS nor JPM had ANY CREDIT available from which to borrow prior to being able to obtain a "bail out". The Fed should also PROVE that "the borrower [wa]s unable to secure adequate credit accommodations from other sources." I happen to believe that such a huge corporation, that was "too big to fail" HAD to have CREDIT it did NOT use to bail itself out. What "major corporation" that's "too big to fail" would NOT have had millions available in credit?CNBC's Steve Liesman reports on a letter from Treasury Secretary Paulson to New York Fed President Tim Geithner (PDF). In the letter, Treasury agrees that the Fed can bill Treasury for any losses from the Bear Stearns deal. Null and void: "Translation: the tax payers will get stuck with the bill."
Why....even STUPID J6P were able to obtain credit for million dollar homes they couldn't even afford.
Agreed!
Unless the 2% loses 100% of its value, your $440 billion estimate is too large.
You're so wrong.
Wrong.
No money was drawn from the treasury. Case dismissed. LOL!
Please, show us the sentence where Treasury agrees that the Fed can bill Treasury for any losses. I'll save you some time, it's not in there. LOL!
It’s already been posted. Sorry you can’t read.
You are wrong....again.
You aren’t qualified to be issue rulings, much less be a judge.
FOFLOL!
The letter doesn’t say what you’ve claimed. LOL!
What do you say “I claimed” this time?
Just this.
In the letter, Treasury agrees that the Fed can bill Treasury for any losses from the Bear Stearns deal.
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.