Showing posts with label libor. Show all posts
Showing posts with label libor. Show all posts

Wednesday, July 25, 2012

It's a Sandy and weill world

Sexy sandy, ohoh,
What have you done, sexy sandy;
You broke the rules, you went the way of Glass Steagall,
You went the way of Glass Steagall,
Sexy Sandy Weill, the greatest (what?) of them all;

Beatles spoof song, Sexy Sandy, or it was, Sexy Sadie


While members of the LaRouche Political Action Committee rallied outside, in his two-hour appearance before the House Finance Committee today, Timothy Geithner was confronted with calls for the reinstatement of Glass Steagall and forced to admit that despite his knowledge of criminal fraud being carried out in fixing the Libor rate, he failed to make a criminal referral to the Department of Justice, as required.
Geithner's appearance today was preceeded by news that the former CEO of CitiGroup, Sandy Weill, known as the "Shatterer of Glass Steagall," had called for the reinstatement of Glass Steagall. The appearance was also preceeded by news coverage in the New York Times, which quoted the former special counsel of the the Federal Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission (FFCIC) saying that Geithner had an obligatin to make a criminal referral and by news coverage in Washington Post which quoted Neil Barovsky saying that Geithner used the Libor rate, which he knew was fraudulent to determine how much AIG had to pay back the government and to set the interest rate for the TALF.
As the hearing opened, Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) began by reporting on Weill's call for the reinstatement of Glass Steagall, describing it as "absolutely huge." She said, "I feel that that is a very strong statement, stronger than the Volcker Rule, calling for the strictest Volcker Rule possible, a return really to Glass-Steagall." She then asked Geithner, "I would like a detailed answer in writing on what does this mean to the financial crisis if investment banking and banking had been separated, what would that have meant for AIG, for Bear Stearns, for Lehman, for Wachovia for all the big banks."
Rep. Walter Jones (R-NC) stated that "the two worst votes I made in the 18 years I've been in Congress were, the Iraq war, which was very unnecessary and the repeal of Glass-Steagall." He then asked Geithner, in light of reported losses at JPMorgan, "Isn't it time to have a discussion and debate about the reinstatement of Glass Steagall?" Jones also added that he hadjoined Rep. Marcy Kaptur in cosponoring HR 1489, which calls for reinstating Glass Steagall, and called for a hearing in the committee on the measure.
Later in the hearing Rep. Bill Huizenga (R-Mich) also asked Geithner for his response to Weill's call to reinstate Glass Steagall. Rep. Stephen Lynch (D-Mass) also raised Weill's call during his questioning. And Rep. Steve Pearce (R-NM) asked for a copy of Geithner's response as requested by Maloney to Weill's call for the reinstatement of Glass-Steagall.
The snake that he is, in answer to Jones, Geithner came out against reinstating Glass Steagall by arguing that it was considered during the deliberations on Dodd-Frank, which he described as "tough" legislation. He then appealed to the Congressmen to "give those reforms a chance to take effect and work."
At the same time Geithner was repeatedly confronted with his criminal complicity in the coverup of the Libor fraud.
Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-Ala), asked Geithner when did he report the Libor rate fixing to the Treasury and to the Department of Justice and to whom? Geithner avoided answering the question in respect to the Department of Justice and instead said that he reported it to the President's Working Group on the Financial Markets in 2008 when he was head of the New York Federal Reserve. Bachus followed up by asking the question raised in the Washington Post by Neil Barovsky, as to why he used the Libor rate, which he knew was fraudlent for AIG and TALP. Geithner's answer was: "We chose LIBOR at that point as did many others."
Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-Texas) followed up on this line of questioning by pointing out that Geithner's "early response" to knowledge of the Libor rate-fixing "was to keep using it." He also took issue with Geithner's statement that "it was our best choice." Hensarling said: "How can a number you know was manipulated be the best choice?" Hensarling also forced Geithner to admit that he was not obligated to use the Libor rate.
Other Republicans followed suit. Rep. Garret (R-NJ) told Geithner that he cannot have cake and eat it too, pointing out that he never once mentioned to the committee in multiple appearances that the Libor rate was fixed. Nor did he mention it during the entire debate over Dodd-Frank.
Rep. Randy Neugebauer (R-Texas) revealed that there are reports of emails about the fixing of the Libor rate dating back to the fall of 2007. Geithner claimed that he only remembered hearing about it in 2008, but said that he is reviewing his earlier emails. Neugebauer stressed that what was involved was not merely a structural problem but was fraud and referring to the comments by the former special counsel to the FFCIC asked Geithner, did he not have an obligation to make a criminal referral? b~~~~While a number of Democrats were soft on Geithner's responsibility for Liborgate, in some cases trying to blame it on the Bush administration and thus let Geithner off the hook, Brad Miller (D-NC) pointed out that the emails reveal not just an opportunity for manipulation of the rates, but an actual criminal act. He then repeated the question first posed by Bachus, which Geithner did not answer. Did you report this to Justice? Geithner initially tried to squirm out of answering the questin by saying that he did not know what the NY Fed staff did. But Miller pressed him and asked specifically whether he, Timothy Geithner, reported it to the Justice Department. Geithner's answer says it all: "No, I did not."
As he was waiting on line to get into the hearing former New York State Governor and Attorney General Eliot Spitzer remarked that Weill's about face is a "game-changer."

Friday, July 13, 2012

Harlem, Sue over LIBOR Banks

LIBOR banks beware, you can sued by cities and by Harlem dudes.


The New York Times reports that there is now a pile-on of cities, states, and municipalities to lawsuits filed in Manhattan Federal Court against the banks that set the LIBOR rate, for having ripped off millions from them. These are cities and other government units that have torn up their budgets, laid people off, and in some cases been forced into bankruptcy. This is hugely explosive politically, especially if properly channeled to putting an end to the financial system which created and thrives on such misery, through LaRouche's Glass-Steagall policies.

The City of Baltimore and a pension fund in Connecticut, the City of New Britain's Firefighters' and Police Benefit Fund, are the first to sue, claiming the LIBOR manipulation cost them millions, according to NPR.
"Now, cities, states, and municipal agencies nationwide, including Massachusetts, Nassau County on Long Island, and California's public pension system, are looking at whether they suffered similar losses and are weighing legal action," the Times reports. Peter Shapiro, an investment advisor to Baltimore and other cities, told the Times that "about 75% of major cities have contracts linked to this" — the LIBOR fixing. "Unambiguously, state and local government agencies lost money because of the manipulation of LIBOR," said Shapiro. "The number is likely to be very, very big."

The banks targetted include Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase, Deutsche Bank, and Barclays. Darrell Duffie, a Stanford professor of finance, estimates that these lawsuits could result in the banks' having to pay out tens of billions of dollars, an estimate in line with recent report by Nomura Equity Research.
The Times story emphasized the losses to cities, etc. from transactions involving interest-rate swaps, just barely mentioning pension funds which lost income on their investments if interest rates were held artificially low.
The rather unlimited potential of these lawsuits was pointed out a week ago by, among others, the Seeking Alpha blog and the NY Times "Dealbook" blog. UBS and Barclays have already admitted to wrong-doing in their settlements with government authorities, and are cooperating with authorities, increasing the pressure on their co-conspirator banks to do the same. These admissions of misconduct will open the floodgates to civil lawsuits, since the proof of wrong-doing is already on the record. This also opens to door to a massive number of suits under U.S. federal anti-trust and racketeering statutes. Both the Sherman Anti-trust Act and the Racketeer-Influences and Corruption Organizations (RICO) Act allow for triple damages, and RICO furthermore allows for recovery of attorneys fees, an incentive for the filing of class-action cases.

Glass-Steagall, Economic Collapse, Empire
San Bernardino, CA, to File for Bankruptcy
18 hours 41 min ago
"Memorandum of Understanding" Secures Spain the Greek Treatment
18 hours 46 min ago
Libor-Gate: Obama and Geithner Gotta Go
19 hours 1 min ago
Pathetic City Defense Against "Glass-Steagallism"
1 day 9 hours ago
The Space In Which To Live
So get into the groove Harlem dudes and get that sweet money.