Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Glenn Greenwald POPPED Tim Geithner in the chops, way before it was cool. [View all]Octafish
(55,745 posts)95. Raw Deal for the 21st Century: Welfare for the Wealthy
Larry Summers, Tim Geithner and Wall Streets ownership of government
The individuals Obama chose to be his top economics officials embody exactly the corruption he repeatedly vowed to end.
BY GLENN GREENWALD
Salon.com SATURDAY, APR 4, 2009
White House officials yesterday released their personal financial disclosure forms, and included in the millions of dollars which top Obama economics adviser Larry Summers made from Wall Street in 2008 is this detail:
Thats $135,000 paid by Goldman Sachs to Summers for a one-day visit. And the payment was made at a time in April, 2008 when everyone assumed that the next President would either be Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton and that Larry Summers would therefore become exactly what he now is: the most influential financial official in the U.S. Government (and the $45,000 Merrill Lynch payment came 8 days after Obamas election). Goldman would not be able to make a one-day $135,000 payment to Summers now that he is Obamas top economics adviser, but doing so a few months beforehand was obviously something about which neither parties felt any compunction. Its basically an advanced bribe. And its paying off in spades. And none of it seemed to bother Obama in the slightest when he first strongly considered naming Summers as Treasury Secretary and then named him his top economics adviser instead (thereby avoiding the need for Senate confirmation), knowing that Summers would exert great influence in determining who benefited from the governments response to the financial crisis.
Last night, former Reagan-era S&L regulator and current University of Missouri Professor Bill Black was on Bill Moyers Journal and detailed the magnitude of what he called the on-going massive fraud, the role Tim Geithner played in it before being promoted to Treasury Secretary (where he continues to abet it), and most amazingly of all the crusade led by Alan Greenspan, former Goldman CEO Robert Rubin (Geithners mentor) and Larry Summers in the late 1990s to block the efforts of top regulators (especially Brooksley Born, head of the Commodities Futures Trading Commission) to regulate the exact financial derivatives market that became the principal cause of the global financial crisis. To get a sense for how deep and massive is the on-going fraud and the key role played in it by key Obama officials, I highly recommend watching that Black interview (it can be seen here and the transcript is here).
This article from Stanford Magazine an absolutely amazing read details how Summers, Rubin and Greenspan led the way in blocking any regulatory efforts of the derivatives market whatsoever on the ground that the financial industry and its lobbyists were objecting:
CONTINUED...
http://www.salon.com/2009/04/04/summers/
Then, that must be the reason for all the happiness among the glass half-full set. The 99-percent were called to fill it.
The individuals Obama chose to be his top economics officials embody exactly the corruption he repeatedly vowed to end.
BY GLENN GREENWALD
Salon.com SATURDAY, APR 4, 2009
White House officials yesterday released their personal financial disclosure forms, and included in the millions of dollars which top Obama economics adviser Larry Summers made from Wall Street in 2008 is this detail:
Lawrence H. Summers, one of President Obamas top economic advisers, collected roughly $5.2 million in compensation from hedge fund D.E. Shaw over the past year and was paid more than $2.7 million in speaking fees by several troubled Wall Street firms and other organizations. . . .
Financial institutions including JP Morgan Chase, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch paid Summers for speaking appearances in 2008. Fees ranged from $45,000 for a Nov. 12 Merrill Lynch appearance to $135,000 for an April 16 visit to Goldman Sachs, according to his disclosure form.
Thats $135,000 paid by Goldman Sachs to Summers for a one-day visit. And the payment was made at a time in April, 2008 when everyone assumed that the next President would either be Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton and that Larry Summers would therefore become exactly what he now is: the most influential financial official in the U.S. Government (and the $45,000 Merrill Lynch payment came 8 days after Obamas election). Goldman would not be able to make a one-day $135,000 payment to Summers now that he is Obamas top economics adviser, but doing so a few months beforehand was obviously something about which neither parties felt any compunction. Its basically an advanced bribe. And its paying off in spades. And none of it seemed to bother Obama in the slightest when he first strongly considered naming Summers as Treasury Secretary and then named him his top economics adviser instead (thereby avoiding the need for Senate confirmation), knowing that Summers would exert great influence in determining who benefited from the governments response to the financial crisis.
Last night, former Reagan-era S&L regulator and current University of Missouri Professor Bill Black was on Bill Moyers Journal and detailed the magnitude of what he called the on-going massive fraud, the role Tim Geithner played in it before being promoted to Treasury Secretary (where he continues to abet it), and most amazingly of all the crusade led by Alan Greenspan, former Goldman CEO Robert Rubin (Geithners mentor) and Larry Summers in the late 1990s to block the efforts of top regulators (especially Brooksley Born, head of the Commodities Futures Trading Commission) to regulate the exact financial derivatives market that became the principal cause of the global financial crisis. To get a sense for how deep and massive is the on-going fraud and the key role played in it by key Obama officials, I highly recommend watching that Black interview (it can be seen here and the transcript is here).
This article from Stanford Magazine an absolutely amazing read details how Summers, Rubin and Greenspan led the way in blocking any regulatory efforts of the derivatives market whatsoever on the ground that the financial industry and its lobbyists were objecting:
As chairperson of the CFTC, Born advocated reining in the huge and growing market for financial derivatives. . . . One type of derivativeknown as a credit-default swaphas been a key contributor to the economys recent unraveling. . .
Back in the 1990s, however, Borns proposal stirred an almost visceral response from other regulators in the Clinton administration, as well as members of Congress and lobbyists. . . . But even the modest proposal got a vituperative response. The dozen or so large banks that wrote most of the OTC derivative contracts saw the move as a threat to a major profit center. Greenspan and his deregulation-minded brain trust saw no need to upset the status quo. The sheer act of contemplating regulation, they maintained, would cause widespread chaos in markets around the world.
Born recalls taking a phone call from Lawrence Summers, then Rubins top deputy at the Treasury Department, complaining about the proposal, and mentioning that he was taking heat from industry lobbyists. . . . The debate came to a head April 21, 1998. In a Treasury Department meeting of a presidential working group that included Born and the other top regulators, Greenspan and Rubin took turns attempting to change her mind. Rubin took the lead, she recalls.
I was told by the secretary of the treasury that the CFTC had no jurisdiction, and for that reason and that reason alone, we should not go forward, Born says. . . . It seemed totally inexplicable to me, Born says of the seeming disinterest her counterparts showed in how the markets were operating. It was as though the other financial regulators were saying, We dont want to know.
She formally launched the proposal on May 7, and within hours, Greenspan, Rubin and Levitt issued a joint statement condemning Born and the CFTC, expressing grave concern about this action and its possible consequences. They announced a plan to ask for legislation to stop the CFTC in its tracks.
CONTINUED...
http://www.salon.com/2009/04/04/summers/
Then, that must be the reason for all the happiness among the glass half-full set. The 99-percent were called to fill it.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
121 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations

Glenn Greenwald POPPED Tim Geithner in the chops, way before it was cool. [View all]
Octafish
Jul 2013
OP
And another contentless comment on the journalist rather than on the content of the OP.
sabrina 1
Jul 2013
#4
Tax payers are being forced to PAY to hear Greenwald say what he's always been saying for free.
railsback
Jul 2013
#9
Tax payers were forced to pay for the gambling debts of the Wall St crooks and so far, not one of
sabrina 1
Jul 2013
#12
Tax payers are also forced to pay the salaries of people like Boehner and King
railsback
Jul 2013
#20
You left out the Democrats who single handedly, without much help from the Republicans, voted to
sabrina 1
Jul 2013
#27
Most of the miscreants could be put away if there was only the will to do it.
Enthusiast
Jul 2013
#65
Do you ever post anything but snark? Do you qualify as "politically liberal"??? nm
rhett o rick
Jul 2013
#17
No, it's truthful to point out blatant hypocrisy and cherry picking which I just did in this thread.
sabrina 1
Jul 2013
#28
You haven't been keeping up. YOU all made it about Greenwald, so all we are doing is cooperating now
sabrina 1
Jul 2013
#33
Every post by that one seems to be substance-free. Even that poster's initial post in this thread
xocet
Jul 2013
#70
Greenwald called for Cheney and the rest of the war criminals to be prosecuted. Did you?
Octafish
Jul 2013
#39
I hear he's going to be on the Pulitzer Prize list for Journalist of the year.
sabrina 1
Jul 2013
#16
That's possible, but that is more likely to go to someone like Bradley Manning, Assange or Snowden.
sabrina 1
Jul 2013
#29
I hear what you are saying. I guess I have to gather my thoughts for another post
Pretzel_Warrior
Jul 2013
#38
You guys are looking more and more desperate with your sad ad hominem comments. nm
rhett o rick
Jul 2013
#18
what, i'm simply using the exact same catchphrases you guys have used. oh wait...
dionysus
Jul 2013
#58
He deserves more than that just for this article on Washington immunizing lawbreaking Telecoms.
Octafish
Jul 2013
#44
While people were marching in the streets against the Patriot Act and the Iraq War....
Cali_Democrat
Jul 2013
#3
I love it when one of the six talking points outlined by Greenwald himself, arrive in every thread
sabrina 1
Jul 2013
#6
We can bring up old information about Greenwald supposedly popping Tim Geithner in the chops
Cali_Democrat
Jul 2013
#11
Okay. Yes, it was admirable that Greenwald, as a private citizen no one had ever heard of,
sabrina 1
Jul 2013
#59
Not getting your point at all. You are using his words admitting to his error in judgement re
sabrina 1
Jul 2013
#78
Well you could post the words you claim are 'hypocritical'. We only disagree if there are words
sabrina 1
Jul 2013
#82
Of course it is. But when you post something that no one seems to understand, and you can't
sabrina 1
Jul 2013
#89
Wow, well that says it all, for sure. A private citizen V elected officials with the power to send
sabrina 1
Jul 2013
#50
The NSa apologists have to get their stories straight. Some say that Greenwald lies at every breath,
rhett o rick
Jul 2013
#79
I agree. Are you willing to forgive Ms. Clinton and support her bid for the presidency? nm
rhett o rick
Jul 2013
#55
It's too early for me to think about that. The next Prez won't be sworn in until 2017. n/t
Cali_Democrat
Jul 2013
#112
When Greenwald found out Bush & Cheney lied, he called for their prosecution. Did you?
Octafish
Jul 2013
#54
She may not be under the bus yet, but "The Group" avoid posts about her like the plague.
rhett o rick
Jul 2013
#37
Well it's a kinder label than others use. And I have a hunch you know what I mean. nm
rhett o rick
Jul 2013
#46
Well if you would all stop talking about him, he wouldn't appear to be 'so adored' as you call
sabrina 1
Jul 2013
#10
No need to apologize, you haven't annoyed me in the least. I love this stuff unlike many other DUers
sabrina 1
Jul 2013
#41
Oh, I don't share your pessism. I see plenty of critical thinking around the Left forums these days,
sabrina 1
Jul 2013
#57
I can agree what your definition of a real journalist is, but could you provide one as an example?nt
adirondacker
Jul 2013
#49
Wrong. Here's his report on Cheney's efforts to cover-up treason and hope for another 9-11.
Octafish
Jul 2013
#60
Derivatives are like a calculus: confusing and designed to leave someone else holding the tab.
Octafish
Jul 2013
#96
Lol, what an interesting 'series of events'. The 'caffeine fiend' was an obvious troll, although I
sabrina 1
Jul 2013
#101
Please tell: Where else did you see any of the conflicts-of-interest and criminality even mentioned?
Octafish
Jul 2013
#109
"It's not just Snowden and illegal NSA spying, Big Money hates Greenwald"
Progressive dog
Jul 2013
#106