Sure, there's lots of "money" left. (Fiat is not a car company here!)
Posted on 02/11/2009 3:03:27 AM PST by Halfmanhalfamazing
RUSH: I want you to listen to this, Paul Kanjorski. He's a Democrat member of Congress from Pennsylvania. He was on C-SPAN's Washington Journal on January 27th.
KANJORSKI: On Thursday at about 11 o'clock in the morning --
RUSH: Stop the tape a second. Go back and recue this. He's talking about September the 18th here. Let me tease you even further. September the 18th is the day last year that the world economy almost came to an end. Don't smirk. It's true, Snerdley. That's what Kanjorski is saying. So he's talking here about Thursday, September the 18th.
KANJORSKI: On Thursday at about 11 o'clock in the morning the Federal Reserve noticed a tremendous drawdown of money market accounts in the United States, to the tune of $550 billion was being drawn out in a matter of an hour or two. The Treasury opened up its window to help. It pumped $105 billion in the system and quickly realized that they could not stem the tide; we were having an electronic run on the banks. They decided to close the operation, close down the money accounts and announce a guarantee of $250,000 per account so there wouldn't be further panic out there.
RUSH: Do you remember this? This is the day I think that the Atlanta banks ran out of one-hundred-dollar bills. But now stop and think of this: A $550 billion withdrawal from money market funds in one-to-two hours. I am convinced -- and there's one more sound bite to go here -- I am convinced that this is what they took to the White House and said to President Bush, "We have got a disaster, you have got to get on board with a bailout," which came later on in October, "you've got to get on board with this $700 billion, the TARP 1," all because 550 -- now, what precipitated this? Here's the second Kanjorski sound bite.
KANJORSKI: If they had not done that, their estimation was that by two o'clock that afternoon, five-and-a-half trillion dollars would have been drawn out of the money market system of the United States, would have collapsed the entire economy of the United States, and within 24 hours the world economy would have collapsed. It would have been the end of our economic system and our political system as we know it. We're really no better off today than we were three months ago because we've had a decrease in the equity positions of banks because other assets are going sour by the moment.
RUSH: Now, this is January 27th, Kanjorski is talking about this, and we have to allow, since Kanjorski is a Democrat he's part of the Pelosi team, we have to allow that some of his comment here is being flavored. When he ends up saying we're no better off today than we were three months ago, some of this is obviously oriented toward panic and getting people to go along with the bailout today, but let's leave that aside because that's traditional Democrat Party politics. If they had not done that, if that $550 billion-dollar withdrawal in an hour or two had not been stopped, if they hadn't closed the windows, he says that five-and-a-half trillion would have been drawn out of the money market system of the United States. Now, when I hear money market I think of savings accounts, higher interest rates than passbook savings at the old downtown building and loan where people park their money temporarily 'til they decide where to put it permanently. He says five-and-a-half trillion would have vanished from the banking system, would have collapsed the entire economy of the US and within 24 hours the world economy would have collapsed.
Now, we've gotta allow here for some exaggeration. It's amazing this was said on C-SPAN on Thursday, January 27th, and nobody picked up on it. We got it from a website called LiveLeak. They were rummaging through things, and they found this. Now, let's assume for a second here that elements of this are true. Let's assume that there was a $550 billion run, electronic run on the banks and money market accounts in one to two hours. The question is who was doing this? Who was withdrawing all this money? And the next question is why? That's where my mind starts exploding, and this is dangerous to have these explosions going this way. Could it have been George Soros? Could it have been a consortium of countries -- Russia, China, Venezuela -- countries that are eager to have Barack Obama elected because they know that will make it easier for them to continue their own foreign policies in the world? In the meantime, five-and-a-half billion dollars in one to two hours, that can probably be confirmed. The five-and-a-half trillion is speculation based on the rate at which money was coming out. We could check that the Fed stopped the trading windows, they closed the window. We do know they were pumping money into the system left and right. And remember when the Federal Reserve loaned elements, $2 trillion and we weren't told who got the money? And we still haven't been told who got the money.
We know that last fall, the Federal Reserve lent $2 trillion to somebody or a series of somebodies, and we still don't know where it went. We know last year that we had a crisis on our hands and everybody was saying if we didn't do this today the country was finished and they got Bush on board, they got Paulson on board. Obviously this kind of news, if somebody from the Fed shows up and Bernanke and Paulson say, "Hey, we got a chance here of losing five-and-a-half trillion dollars if we don't do something," I mean that's gotta scare anybody into some sort of action to stem the tide. RUSH: We have an AP-Obama story here that targets the date of this run on money market accounts to September 16th. It was Kanjorski on C-SPAN on January 27th, said it was Thursday the 18th. Here's the AP story: "A money-market mutual fund that 'broke the buck' amid a rush of orders to pull out cash has begun returning an initial $26 billion to investors who had been unable to access their money for more than a month. ... On Sept. 16, the rapid sell-off of assets caused the value of fund assets to fall to 97 cents for each investor dollar put in -- the first instance in 14 years of a money-market mutual fund 'breaking the buck,' or having its per-share value fall below $1. Reserve Management froze redemption orders. That led institutional investors to pull out cash..." I think both dates are right. September 16th, the rapid sell-off begins and "[t]hat led institutional investors to pull out cash from that fund and others, creating fears about the safety of the $3.4 trillion in assets held in money-market funds, and a new temporary government money fund guarantee program.'" It's sort of just a casual, hey, no-big-deal kind of story from the Associated Press -- and here again is Kanjorski talking about this. Let's go back to these two sound bites, Paul Kanjorski (Democrat-Pennsylvania) on C-SPAN's Washington Journal on January 27th.
KANJORSKI: On Thursday at about 11 o'clock in the morning, the Federal Reserve noticed a tremendous drawdown of money market accounts in the United States to the tune of $550 billion was like being drawn out in a matter of an hour or two. The Treasury opened up its window to help. They pumped $105 billion in the system and quickly realized that they could not stem the tide; we were having an electronic run on the banks. They decided to close the operation, close down the money accounts and announce a guarantee of $250,000 per account so there wouldn't be further panic out there.
RUSH: By the way, I should tell you that Kanjorski's source for this is none other than Bernanke -- Ben Bernanke, the Federal Reserve -- and the Treasury secretary, Hank Paulson. They are the two figures that told members of Congress what was going on with this initial run of $550 billion, an electronic run on the banks, money market accounts, investor accounts here. He goes on to say this, if they had not stepped in to stop this, if they had not closed the window...
KANJORSKI: If they had not done that, their estimation was that by two o'clock that afternoon, $5-1/2 trillion dollars would have been drawn out of the money market system of the United States, would have collapsed the entire economy of the United States, and within 24 hours the world economy would have collapsed. It would have been the end of our economic system and our political system as we know it. We're really no better off today than we were three months because we had a decrease in the equity positions of banks because other assets are going sour by the moment.
RUSH: So the last part, I think that's just salesmanship for doing something now to get the stimulus bill passed, although Kanjorski is among some Democrats starting to shift to the cant that more time is needed to make a correct decision this time; which I think is one of the reasons Geithner postponed his announcement to today from last week or even today. So, you know, I have been suspicious of all this that happened last fall. It just seemed too perfectly timed. Now we know that these are not individual money market accounts like you would have had to withdraw your money. This is money invested in a mutual fund money market account. So it is quite possible somebody could have started a run on this thing and the word spread, and it did -- and the $550 billion withdrawal in one hour would panic anybody. So there's so much to this. You know, it's always the case that there's so much more going on in all this that we don't know. The Drive-By Media, any longer, is worthless in ferreting out the truth involved in events. They totally exist on the surface. They exist with a path of least resistance particularly with Democrats in power, because with the presumption that Democrats could abuse power or commit ethics violations just doesn't even cross the radar. It doesn't even show up on the radar. It's not possible for Democrats to behave in that fashion, and so all this stuff goes on below the surface and we find out about it much later after the fact.
Sure, there's lots of "money" left. (Fiat is not a car company here!)
Flashback:
“The revelation of the Federal Reserve Board’s final decision to trigger the Crash of 1929 appears, amazingly enough, in the New York Times. On April 20, 1929, the Times headlined:
Federal Advisory Council Mystery Meeting in Washington
Resolutions were adopted by the council and transmitted to the board, but their purpose was closely guarded. An atmosphere of deep mystery was thrown about the proceedings both by the board and the council. Every effort was made to guard the proceedings of this extraordinary session. Evasive replies were given to newspaper correspondents.
Only the innermost council of “The London Connection” knew that it had been decided at this “mystery meeting” to bring down the curtain on the greatest speculative boom in American history. Those in the know began to sell off all speculative stocks and put their money in government bonds. Those who were not privy to this secret information, and they included some of the wealthiest men in America, continued to hold their speculative stocks and lost everything they had.”
http://www.modernhistoryproject.org/mhp/ArticleDisplay.php?Article=SecretsCh12
Same scam, different century.
PS-I like your screen name!
Tell me again how this guy got American Citizenship? Tell me again why the press is not the least interested in researching this guy's history? Oh yes I forgot...he finances Moveon.org which finances all those wonderful ads...like the one “General Betrayus”.
And HELL YES it caused a Panic!
Thanks. Interestingly, EdinVa, to whom I have been married for many, many years, caught this almost right away.
Somehow, I don’t think that there will be a thorough investigation of this under the present administration by either the Executive or the Legistlative unless a coalition can be formed starting with Kanjorski and others like him and Rush takes it further.
The starting point obviously would be to examine who put how much in that they could withdraw so much so quickly.
Like our members of Congress? Stakeholders of the Fed banks? Too many secrets for these folks?
You guys might want to review OUR history.
http://www.modernhistoryproject.org/mhp/ArticleDisplay.php?Article=SecretsCh12
That was a stunning tape. Sounds like either Soros or a major Country like China or Iran was pulling money out to manipulate the election. Looks like they overplayed their hand and nearly destroyed the economy. Wonder if Soros had inside information about Fannie?
Pray for America, Our Troops and obama’s Guidance
Looks like the *Sliders* are functioning.
See link at #67.
Same crew, different century. (yes, CFR, Clinton Global Initiative, Soros is guilty)
Conspiracy theories are no different than news stories. Many of them are pure bunk, but some of them are right on target.
“I can not believe Rush is becoming a person who believes in conspiracies.”
Rush is not speculating. He is connecting dots based upon information that exists in the world.
Why is it that when Liberals speculate, they are engaging in “brilliant” reasoning.
When people like Limbaugh look at circumstances and come to conclusions, there is suggestion of mental deficiency?
Why is that?
IMHO
Just in case you haven’t seen this yet ping.
No-speculators drove up the price of oil-Lehman had a hand in it also. No conspiracy only insatiable greed and high tech gambling by traders.
‘We can obviously discount a demand growth of only 2% per year as the main factor. The weakening USD is a major cause; but what is feeding the balance of oil price growth? No oil buyer has been told to, “Come back next week with your tanker.” If the UN-JODI is to be believed then demand by the top 30 nations declined 1.8% from Feb.2007 to Feb.2008. But over the same time period the price for oil increased 59%. Given that demand is modest to declining, according to the reporting-agencies, and the supply of oil is always available, what can account for this pricing disjuncture? Especially when Carl B.Weinberg [chief economist, High Frequency Economics] notes that, “many analysts are now thinking that fundamentals support a price of $70 to $80 a barrel [“Coming: Cheaper Oil and a Stronger Buck,” Barron’s, Mar.24, 2008].” While the statement [June 6, 2008] by Israeli Transportation Minister Shaul Mofaz, “If Iran continues its nuclear arms program we will attack,” does not calm the oil market, it is a transitory event. The answer lies in the commodities futures, index market.
‘The traditional futures-market participants, commodity buyers and producers, trade oil in order to manage the risks of rising or falling prices in their own businesses. But there is another category of participants in the oil market. It is those who began to view physical oil merely as a financial asset within a portfolio; these are the institutional-investors or index speculators.
Hiding as commercial accounts, thru a Commodity Futures Trading Commission exemption to avoid speculative position limits, these institutional-investors use commodities index-futures to hold positions in oil. But not as traditional buyers of oil would, but as financial speculations. This feeds the demand side, without ever, actually demanding oil. Eighty two percent (82%) of WTI futures [net increase from 01/01/03 to 03/12/08] was purchased by institutional-investors [Testimony of Michael Masters before the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, U.S. Senate, p.3, May 20, 2008].
He further notes that Index Speculators “never sell” their positions but, “roll their positions by buying calendar spreads.” True, their positions are closed but then they are continuously reopened. According to Michael Masters the increase in institutional-investor position’s on WTI futures increased 539% over five and one-quarter years [102% per year on average]. Momentum in price attracts attention and so more and more institutions enter trades, ratcheting the price upward. How can experts claim that such an influx of non-traditional buyers into index-futures, at this magnitude, does not effect spot prices?
Answer: they cannot. The pricing signal that index-speculators are sending to the spot market is a false signal. Their financial demand is only for oil futures, not barrels of oil. For persons to claim it is really the huge demand [2% per year + marginal decline] or supply disruptions [that never happen] is to be otherwise engaged. When oil commodities futures index prices rise the spot price must also increase to avoid contango. The degree of self-interest in this issue is very high; what that will mean for financial reform is left to the cynicism of the reader.’
Rush is either kidding or has lost his mind...hope it’s the former.
Joe Kennedy was a major reason for the Great Depression by shorting the market and then forcing a crash. What if Soros or somebody did the same thing. Imagine Shorting Chase or Citi and then starting this collapse, you would make $Billions while installing your candidate.
Pray for America
Also, we expect wacko theories from the left who see a conspiracy around every corner...however, the right has in general been more sensible...I can not believe Rush is serious.
Really, you have a link for this assertion about Kennedy? The old story is that Joe knew it was time to get out of the market because a shoeshine boy confided he had bought stock. Joe reasoned that if a shoeshine boy bought stock...there were no buyers left...the rest is history.
There is no way such a large conspiracy would remain secret for long-no one can keep their mouths shut these days...everyone wants to find some deep dark conspiracy in everything that reaffirms a political belief-left or right...it’s nonsense. The traders took bad risks...gambled essentially and as in 29 they paid the price for their irresponsibility, and unfortunately they bankrupted the country.
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.