Yesterday, in a stunning display of arrant contempt, 3 of the big-bank CEOs who had been summoned to the White House blew off the President of the United States. Mr. Obama was expecting them at a televised meeting of their peers so he could be seen to be lecturing them on how they needed to increase consumer lending, among other things.(An aside: in case you've forgotten, the big banks were given $700 billion late last year in order to resume lending to consumers, among other things. Unfortunately, there were no strings attached to the deal, and as a result, the banksters are able to borrow money from Uncle Sam at 0% interest while lending it to you at 30%. Have a look at your latest credit card statement to see this in action, or wait until tax time rolls around in April. You'll pay one way or the other.
(They were also supposed to stop paying outlandish bonuses, but as you'll no doubt see in a couple of weeks, that won't happen either. Now you know why many of the big banks paid back their obligations to the government just recently - since they're no longer subject to limits on executive compensation, they're going to do it again.)
As the New York Times describes it:
Putting Obama on Hold, in a Hint of Who’s BossAh, the old bad weather excuse. Try that out on your own boss the next time you're called on the carpet. Make sure you stand him up on national TV too - nothing like losing face on the world stage. Just to twist the knife a few times, the Daily Show went after this too, in a Clusterf#@k to the Poor House piece:
President Obama didn’t exactly look thrilled as he stared at the Polycom speakerphone in front of him. "Well, I appreciate you guys calling in," he began the meeting at the White House with Wall Street’s top brass on Monday.
He was, of course, referring to the three conspicuously absent attendees who were being piped in by telephone: Lloyd C. Blankfein, the chief executive of Goldman Sachs; John J. Mack, chairman of Morgan Stanley; and Richard D. Parsons, chairman of Citigroup.
Their excuse? "Inclement weather," according to the White House. More precisely, fog delayed flights into Reagan National Airport. That awkward moment on speakerphone in the White House, for better or worse, spoke volumes about how the balance of power between Wall Street and Washington has shifted again, back in Wall Street’s favor.
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| Clusterf#@k to the Poor House - Flight Delay | ||||
| ||||
This obviously makes the President look bad, at the very least. More informed readers should now realize that the man in the Oval Office, whoever he is and whatever his political persuasion, is a bankster tool. Is this the "change we can believe in" that brought record numbers of new voters to the polls last year? Are you now over your 2008 Hopium high? If not, have a look at Matt Taibbi's latest article, Obama's Big Sellout (NB: Taibbi's full of shit when it comes to 9/11, but the axes he grinds against the banksters seem pretty accurate so far).
President Obama said last Sunday night that he "did not run for office to be helping out a bunch of fat-cat bankers on Wall Street." Well, actions speak louder than words, and anyway, doesn't this remind you a little bit of Bill Clinton's famous Presidential one-liner?
"I did not have sexual relations with that woman..."Tell you what, you can keep the "change" - I'll keep it real.
1 comment:
This whole bankster fraud and theft gets even better if the people of this nation understood the real fraud.
That real fraud is that the money a bank loans you dose NOT come from it's own vault; that money is created by the borrower at the moment he/she signs the promissory note(alleged loan). The bank now lists that dollar amount on it's books as an asset, (like a checking account depsoit), and on the other side of the ledger lists it as a "liability (the alleged loan they made to you). The so-called borrower now has to pay back that amount plus interest.
You, in effect and fact created the very money you borrowed; you actually loaned the bank the money they allege they loaned you.
So here's part of the biggest fraud; it is that none of the banks who claimed to have lost all that money due to foreclosures NEVER had a dime of their own money out for those loans. And yet they went to the government and had them pay them with taxpayer funds; many of the same taxpayers who are paying off loans that don't exist.
A simple analogy of this fraud is this: I ask you to give me a hundred dollar bill, which you do. You then tell me you need to borrow a hundred dollars; I loan you that hundred dollars, BUT it's your own hundred dollar bill you gave me; I now demand you pay me back that hundred PLUS interest. But I never give you back the hundred bill you gave me.
So why should any of those banks who allegedly loaned money to people to finance a house care whether any of those alleged borrowers could make the payments WHEN in fact the bank never loaned them a dime out their vaults. The borrowers created every dime the supposedly borrowed. So when they defaulted on payments did the banks lose anything? Of course not. As a matter of fact they gained in more wyas than one. One way is the bank now owns a house free and clear that they can re-sell at any price. Secondly they were reimbursed by the government for every non-existent dollar they didn't really loan
If the stupid fools, AKA voters, ever figured out or learned about this phoney scam they'd hang every banker in the country.
And to add insult to injury, the government allows this unlawful practice to continue.
Post a Comment