Recent Items

Elizabeth Warren in Treasury Crosshairs Again (Update/Correction: Treasury Disputes Media Reports)

Posted on by

To say there is no love lost between Treasury and Elizabeth Warren is probably putting it mildly.

Treasury was gunning for her ouster in early 2009; I heard multiple accounts both of how concerted the Administration opposition to her was (recall she was actually chosen as head of the Congressional Oversight Panel before the regime change), with the clear objective of forcing her out. Eventually, after firm pushback from some very influential individuals (I’ve heard variants of the story, but there isn’t any dispute as to who the key actors were), the pressure receded, but only after Warren was semi-neutralized. As I noted in “On Pelosi’s Duplicity and Apparent Sandbagging of Elizabeth Warren“:

So why are we pointing a finger at Pelosi in particular? The next chapter is her appointment of one Richard Nieman to the Congressional Oversight Panel. Under the TARP rules, the House Majority leader selects one of the oversight panel members, so this choice was completely under her control.

Nieman is the New York Superintendent of Banks. He helped Goldman set up its bank holding company.

Nieman fell out with the other Democrats and wrote a joint opinion with John Sununu (see page 88 of the document). If you were somehow ignorant of the fact that the Summers/Geithner programs embody massive hidden and inefficient subsidies to banks (the Public Private Investment Partnership), questionable uses of the FDIC, and the employment of the Fed as quasi-fiscal agent, the critique might sound reasonable. But to anyone with a passing acquaintance with the facts, the dissenting views are absurd. To give you an idea of how far they have to stretch to make their arguments sound plausible, they grasp at the straw of “oh yeah, that over 50 point spread between market price and bank valuation for toxic assets is due to a liquidity discount.”

There is also sophisticated mud-slinging, for instance, suggesting that the panel’s recommendations run against the

…preference for maintaining a private banking system via temporary public support or partnership, which is consistent with this country’s tradition of private rather than government control of business

That’s code for “Warren is a commie”. Didn’t anyone tell these clowns that no private investor with an operating brain cell would give so much money to a private enterprise without demanding a good deal of oversight and control? And at a time like this, the public versus private polarity that they invoke has been blunted. Pretending that wards of the state are entitled to the rights of normal private concerns is absurd, yet that’s the fiction that Nieman and Sununu present.

Maybe I’m too cynical, but this sure looks like the behavior of someone looking for his next, bigger meal ticket.

But then we come back to Pelosi. I can’t imagine that Nieman would have fallen in with the Republicans without at least as a courtesy informing Pelosi in advance. And if she had a big problem, she would have gotten him to back down (either not siding with the opposition or issuing a separate view that was more ambivalent). So Pelosi is at a minimum sitting this one out (which I deem unlikely) or on board with the program to undermine Warren.

Yves again During the period when the COP was openly and effectively critical of the TARP, there was also a full court press in the media against Warren.

Warren is the obvious choice to head the otherwise-guaranteed-to-be-a-joke consumer financial services agency due to set up its shingle at the Fed. She has been a tireless consumer advocate, is trusted and well liked by the public at large, an effective communicator and a respected legal scholar, and is willing to stare down political opponents. All those qualities make her hugely threatening. Banksters and their lobbyist allies have been saying loudly and clearly that they are firmly opposed to having Warren head the new consumer agency. So, predictably, Geithner acts as their water-carrier. As Shahien Nasiripour reported in the Huffington Post:

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has expressed opposition to the possible nomination of Elizabeth Warren to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, according to a source with knowledge of Geithner’s views….

Warren’s persistent oversight is part of the reason for Geithner’s opposition, according to the source.

In addition, her increasing public profile could make it difficult for Geithner, who will oversee the unit until it’s transferred to the Federal Reserve. His role would involve trying to balance her advocacy on behalf of borrowers with the demands of the nation’s major financial institutions, his traditional constituency.

Geithner’s objections to Warren taking over that role also involve her views on Wall Street, sources say. The longtime professor believes the nation’s megabanks are Too Big To Fail and have been among the biggest abusive lenders in the country. Her toughness on giant banks is said to be a longtime source of tension with Geithner.

Obama’s top economic adviser, Lawrence Summers, is also said to have a strained relationship with Warren, though his stance on her nomination is not known.

Yves here. Summer’s position may not be public, but there is no chance he will support her (save as a part of a bizarre kabuki; a show of support by Summers would be proof her candidacy was dead, but the Administration needed to pretend to have dissent, as opposed to unified opposition). He and Geithner are Rubin proteges, staunch supporters of banks uber alles.

Simon Johnson argues the Administration would be well served to support Warren:

With his track record of survival, Geithner and his team apparently feel they can push hard against Elizabeth Warren and give the new consumer protection job to someone closer to their philosophy – which is much more sympathetic to the banking industry.

This would be a bad mistake – trying the patience of already exasperated Congressional Democrats. If the Obama administration can’t even complete the deal they implicitly agreed with Senators over the past months, this will set of a firestorm of protest within the party (and with anyone else who is paying attention).

Financial “reform” is already very weak. If Secretary Geithner gets his way on consumers protection, pretty much all of the Democrats efforts vis-à-vis the financial sector’s treatment of customers have been for naught.

Yves here. But Johnson misses the real calculus for this Administration. It may actually see loss of the Democrat majority in the House as a win (as in is finding creative ways to rationalize its fallen standing as a possible longer-term advantage). First, it allows Team Obama to blame whatever happens (or fails to happen) on the Republicans. Second, it gives the Administration plenty of air cover to become more openly corporatist (recall Clinton’s famed move to the right after the 1994 mid term debacle).

The Administration is not about to change its stripes and suddenly take an action that might actually lead to some effective measures against the financial services industry. It’s clear they will oppose a Warren appointment; the only question is how openly they will do so.

Update 3:30 PM Apologies for the late update. I was off the grid till now (up till 7:00 AM). Our Tom Adams was on a conference call with the Treasury late this AM, and Treasury denied the reports that Geither was opposed to Warren (which apparently started with Reuters), and said he supported her nomination.

Update 3:50 PM Just received this via e-mail from Treasury:

Andrew Williams, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Public Affairs:

“Elizabeth Warren has been a driving force behind the creation of the consumer financial protection bureau, and we have worked very closely with her over the past year and a half to make that idea a reality.

“Given her strong leadership on consumer protection, Secretary Geithner believes that Elizabeth Warren is exceptionally well qualified to lead the new bureau, and, ultimately, that’s a decision the President will have to make.”

Print Friendly
Twitter19DiggReddit0StumbleUpon1Facebook15LinkedIn0Google+0bufferEmail

64 comments

    1. Raging Debate

      What you just said about Born was exactly my thought reading the article.

      We the People are left with no choice but to vote out all incumbents until some form of sanity emerges. It is a new form of Civil War, better than the last one because this one is being fought with cash. What a tremendous waste of needed human and intellectual capital…

      1. liberal

        “Voting all incumbents out” is crazy. That would mean Republican control of both houses.

        Yes, the Democrats are bad, and yes, corporate power is the one issue where the Dems are not much better than the Republicans.

        But looking at the overall picture, while the Dems are bad, the Republicans are much, much worse.

        1. Bernard

          so we sit around and watch the “kill” being bled to death. Neither party is interested in saving the “kill”.. they are both going to let us die. i want to go quickly, thank you very much.

        2. Mark G.

          Republicans, Democrats all the same. No difference. They respond to one thing, money. It is the holy dollar that makes it all go around.

    2. anon48

      David,

      Good idea. Called my congressman this afternoon- Patrick Murphy (D from PA) and left a voicemail message with one of his aides. Don’t do this much. Last time was a lengthy email (sent more than a year ago) explaining why he should vote against the way TARP funding was structured. I assume I’ll get the same response as last time- none.

      This guy is in a real election dogfight for his seat with the former congressman (R) whom he replaced. Right now, all of his other political strategies seem to be blowing up in his face(e.g. public proclamation of his sponsoring a local job fair- turned out there were no serious employment opportunities being offered at the fair.) So far I’ve observed him being nothing more than a party lackey. Other D’s know he’s in trouble and so started to assign him leadership positions.

      I haven’t seen him put forth any meaningful initiatives that would reign in the financial sector( or anything else for that matter). Publicly supporting Elizabeth Warren would be a smart move in our district(slight majority of moderate R’s). A good number of people know who she is and what she stands for. R’s wouldn’t be able to sandblast him on this one. Although it might annoy certain members of the Obama team and some of his political benefactors

      Yves, thanks for keeping us up to speed about Elizabeth Warren’s situation.

      1. anon48

        The Congressman’s office actually returned the call. They listened politely. They seem to admire her also. We’ll see what happens.

  1. Gentlemutt

    “Second, it gives the Administration plenty of air cover to become more openly corporatist (recall Clinton’s famed move to the right after the 1994 mid term debacle).”

    Interesting point you make, Yves. Obama’s admin does sort of reminds me of the Getulio Vargas period in 1930-40s Brazil. Use the appearance of Populism to manage the plebes on behalf of the business sector. I think Vargas was much better at it, though, witness his Roosevelt-like longevity.

    1. Bonesetter Brown

      Republicans gaining control of at least the House is Obama’s only hope at a second term. Unemployment is going to be very in 2012 any way you slice it. Obama desperately needs to have the Republicans to run against in 2012. If Dems were to keep control of both houses, I would not be suprised to see a primary challenge to Obama.

      1. Bernard

        you think that if the Democrats hold the house, Obama will lose?

        enough incentive yet to have Obama lose!!! enough incentive indeed!!

  2. alex

    Don’t forget the squirm video that the HuffPo article links to.

    Elizabeth Warren Makes Timmy Geithner Squirm Over AIG and Goldman Sachs Bailouts: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pz7ruJw6byQ

    After watching that I’m completely opposed to Elizabeth Warren as head of the CFSPA – I want her for President!

    Yves, Dean Baker and Bill Black will of course also have prominent positions in the new administration.

    1. Cody Willard

      Funny, I’ve said many times on TV that a Warren/Barofsky ticket for Prez/VP would be a dream come true. Liz for Prez indeed!

      Yves for Fed Chairman.

    2. NOTaREALmerican

      Nope, only sociopaths owned by the smartest amoral scumbags can run for “election”.

      There’s even a song for it:

      http://www.hoocoodanode.org/node/7739#comment-899803

      I’m a smart, amoral scumbag,
      And I always get my way;
      I take advantage of every situation
      That might augment my pay.

      If you’re dumbass enough to think
      That your government works for you,
      I’m here to guarantee it,
      That you haven’t got a clue.

      My lobbyists are working ’round the clock
      To see my whims prevail,
      And through my contributions
      Make sure reforms will fail

      Before they even hit the floor,
      Subject to any vote,
      With carefully crafted loopholes
      That I, myself, re-wrote

      In such confusing language
      It would cause your eyes to glaze,
      But amongst my kind
      I think you’ll find
      Worthy of the highest praise.

      Around you I run circles
      Without even breaking sweat,
      ‘Cause while you fight each other,
      I’m taking all that I can get.

      I take my cues from Darwin,
      Whom I think once said,
      “Survival of the fittest,
      Otherwise, you’re dead.”

    3. Bruce Johnson

      It appears that Obama’s “Team of Rivals” has been transformed into Geithner’s “Team of Sycophants”

  3. K Ackermann

    You know what? Warren has stood up for us; we should stand up for her.

    We have to start somewhere, and we should make sure she knows she has a mandate and the backing of the people.

    Can we, please, stand up for her?

    1. K Ackermann

      Yves, you know all the blogs. Not to put it on you, but if we designed some sort of logo, do you think you could convince other blog owners to fly it?

      I’m sorry to even ask like this, and maybe there are better ways that others might suggest.

      We have so little representation and Warren is one that is on our side, yet they are trying to remove even that little bit.

  4. reslez

    Having a majority in Congress is a tremendous dilemma for Democrats. It forces them to invent increasingly sketchy excuses for their repeated cave-ins to their corporate liege lords (thank goodness for the filibuster!). Once Republicans are back in charge it will be so much easier to surrender without a fight. That’s how you get the best government money can buy.

    Now all we need are a few more Tea Potters to rant and rage about the 17,000 page tax code enacted of, by, and for the corporations and replace it with a stunningly regressive flat tax. They’re so adorable and convenient — lovely little lambs who lead themselves to the slaughter. Almost as adorable as the little lambs who want “change” and vote for the same old wolves every time.

    1. NOTaREALmerican

      I’m going out on a limb here, but I’m prediction a 99% sweep for the Republicrat Party this November. The favorite Party of the dumbasses.

      (Remember, you heard it from me on this site first!)

      1. Bob Visser

        Is that not the problem of Democracy, America’s major export? Refer your own H.L. Mencken: ” Democracy is simply a battle of charlatans for the vote of idiots”. BV

  5. Aunt Deb

    Which Dems would be the best ones to call about this? I would like to call those Congress members who might be the most influential in this instance. Would it make sense to call one’s governor, also? I would think states might have some concerns about this.

  6. Tom Crowl

    Elizabeth Warren is one of the heroes!

    She sees the big picture that extends far beyond this most recent insanity.

    When she stated that the middle class had been carved up like ‘Thanksgiving Turkeys’ over the last several decades she had it right…

    The LAST thing the ‘uber-class’ wants citizens to realize is that they’re considered a big stupid bird to be humored and then slaughtered…

    For the uber-class citizens are a nuisance and citizenship should be degraded as much as possible…

    (This has a lot to do with the unwillingness to deal intelligently with our immigration issues btw)

    History is NOT going to view this period of ‘self-governance’ in a very positive way.

    Self-governance requires an informed, involved and empowered citizenry.

    However GOVERNMENT DOES NOT!

    This is an inherent conflict that needs urgent (and, in fact constant) attention.

    Checks and Balances are not functioning properly (and these issues get no serious attention). Globalism may be a worthy goal… but NOT at the expense of fair and reasoned good governance that encourages an able citizenry.

    Governments and Large Corporations want you as a “Thanksgiving Turkey”…

    In truth it’s as much a part of their nature as it is for a cat to chase a mouse.

    I’m neither a turkey nor a mouse. And in the final analysis neither are most of you.

    The good news is their world ‘model’ isn’t going to work.
    The bad news is… its failure is likely to be messy.

  7. Siggy

    I’m not sold on the idea of a consumer protection agency. If there is to be one, Dr. Elizabeth Warren is an excellent choice. She’s being doing it ad hoc for quite some time. knows the law and is an extremely good communicator.

    There’s a very straight up reason that Geithner etal don’t want Warren, in the CPA post she’s liable to expose the fraud that was and is the bailout of AIG.

  8. Rex

    How naive was I to think that this administration might actually be a bit better than the last one? The only real difference in net effect is that this president is much more cowardly, wussy and indirect than the last one. All the scum and motivations seem to amount to about the same.

    Is it any surprise that they would want to get rid of a person who is actually trying to do the right thing for the country and its people?

    Seems there may be no real hope for that change we wanted until after the whole system comes crashing down.

    Depressing.

  9. the.Duke.of.URL

    I am with those who want to support Warren. She is getting shafted, just like Brooksley Born. Let me know.

    How about checking out Legoland? Or better yet, Slotsholmen (historic)or the Indre By maze?

  10. PeonInChief

    Nancy Pelosi has been in bed with the banking interests since she got to Congress. I know. I lived in her district at the time she was elected. (I voted for Harry Britt.) It was noted in the local press that she had opted for a spot on one of the financial services committees, as that was where the money was.

  11. Transor Z

    Not usually a political guy but I’m willing to get political to support her nomination. This needs to happen.

  12. /L

    I’m not an American but think the Americans should settle for no less. She is an remarkable woman.

    Our favorite Timmy has weighed in on Elizabeth Warren. Lest readers need any reminder, Warren is the lone sensible voice within the Obama administration. There is, with no exaggeration at all, no other administration official who deserves her or his job more than Warren does. If—and this is a big if—the US survives the current crisis, there is no one who deserves more accolades than Warren. Heck, half the men (and perhaps the same percent of women) in the country have already proposed marriage to her. Yet, Timmy Geithner (let me repeat that: Timmy! Geithner!) the most incompetent and conflicted public official since “heck-uv-a-job” Brownie has dared to oppose Ms. Warren to lead the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

    Actually I agree with Timmy. Elizabeth Warren ought to be gunning for Timmy’s job. Fire Geithner. Now. Elizabeth Warren for Treasury Secretary! And in 2012, Warren for President. We should settle for no less.
    L. Randall Wray

  13. Doug Terpstra

    “Yves here. But Johnson misses the real calculus for this Administration. It may actually see loss of the Democrat majority in the House as a win…”

    Oh, you clearly perceive the web they weave. This tracks with Cynthia’s link to the DLC strategy (conspiracy). Obama has a perfect record of appointing foxes as henhouse guards, including recently oil man Salazar and Wellpoint’s Liz Fowler to foul the coop in overseeing wealthcare ‘reform’. He is quite literally begging the “opposition” troupe to throw him into Slick Willie’s 1994 briar patch. There is not a snowball’s chance Obama will appoint Warren to a post with any real authority. What a wicked and perverse administration.

    BTW, isn’t the CFSPA, the “new and improved” CPA—under the FED—essentially a stillborn miscarriage? Why would Warren want to jump into that snake pit, unless she’s growing scales?

  14. Peter T

    I would like to know, too, what I could do to support Elizabeth Warren as head of the Financial Consumer Protection Agency. I will write my representative and my senator, but I see only one senator possibly not supporting her anyhow (Klobuchar). Obama has been such a disappointment on the financial sector, from his choice of Treasury secretary to his choice of Rubinite advisors and now to possibly not supporting Elizabeth Warren. Even if he finally does support her, he could just try to play the Clinton game of following Rubin and having Reich as a fig leaf.

  15. Tom Hickey

    It’s been obvious that the Democratic Establishment has been in bed with you know who for a long time, vying for campaign cash with the GOP. This system runs on bribery aka campaign finance and lobbying. The establishments of both parties are whores. The only difference is that the GOP enjoys it, and the Dems not so much, so occasionally someone like Warren slips though the filter.

    1. lambert strether

      Please, let’s not insult whores. The courtiers in Versailles, of whichever legacy party, do more damage and evil in a few minutes than a whore can do in a lifetime.

    2. Peter T

      Tom Hickey:
      > This system runs on bribery aka campaign finance and lobbying. (…) The only difference is that the GOP enjoys it, and the Dems not so much,

      How do you know their feelings when serving the rich? Serving the rich has been the essence of both parties for some time now, after all most federal politicians belong to that class and self-serving comes natural. The biggest difference seem to be whom they also serve: Social conservatives for the GOP, and public sector unions for the Dems.

  16. Francois T

    If the Administration is stupid enough to oppose Warren, they will pay dearly in the polls.

    Warren is nothing less than a phenom; excellent communicator, well-respected in academinc circles, liked by media figures (Check Joe Scarborough undisguised admiration toward her) of diverse political stripes, (I’m excluding Fix News, of course!) and loved by the public.

    Furthermore, as a tenured professor, her job and pension are totally safe. Plus, she has nothing to prove professionally to anyone at 69 years of age. It is also obvious that big names don’t intimidate her one bit, and she speaks her mind. Note also that all the attempts at smearing her have failed.

    In a word, she can’t be bought, intimidated or silenced.

    I’m at the point of wishing the Administration openly oppose her. The blowback would be ugly…and well deserved.

    1. NOTaREALmerican

      Re: they will pay dearly in the polls.

      Surely you’re joking…

      I don’t know a single peasant that would have any clue who she is. Most of the peasants I work with would be suspicious of her as being “one of them liberals trying to interfere with the hard-workin bidnesses tryin’ to make an honest livin’ in this great and glorious nation”.

      I suspect the liberal dumbasses are the same as the conservative ones. They’ll “support” whoever their celebrity leaders tell them to support. After-all, these people still have their “Bring Steven Home” & “Endless War” bumper stickers on their cars.

      Duplicity is the strongest force on the planet (after self-delusion).

    2. doc holiday

      “In a word, she can’t be bought, intimidated or silenced.”

      Bullshit! Look at the BP media blackout and the mentality of the TARP charade and all the bankers and political prostitutes that are lined up for more and more of the same payoffs. Warren is toast and she needs to bail out ASAP to protect what positive image she does have. There is no way for her to win any battle against the wall street mafia and Warren will end up with a horse head in her bed, or some wild-ass claim as to why she is impacting homeland security, and so on and so on.

      The vast majority of Americans get news from Fox and National Enquirer, so if stories have her connected to being a meth user that has sex with goats — the majority of American retards will want her crucified ASAP. You can already see the attention span of these retards with the BP oil spill and hence, subjecting Warren to a witch-hunt and fleshing her out as an anti-business commie is a no brainer, which the brainless will soak up, with that there sponge-like stuff betwix thur ears! Hang her higher, get more tar!!!!

    1. Bernard

      if the Dems stay in power, the ride is going to even more bumpy. gives the Republicans cover to blame the Dems and screws us even more efficiently

  17. Doc Holiday

    Warren is a commie, and maybe a deus ex machina?

    See: CADMUS
    (aside) Oh god, oh god! Once these women have seen what they’ve done, they will ache with a terrible ache. If only forever you could remain in this state you’re in now, though not lucky, you would seem not unlucky.

    ==> “In 1938, Hallie Flanagan, the head of the Federal Theatre Project, was subpoenaed to appear before the committee to answer the charge that the project was overrun with communists. Flanagan was called to testify for only a part of one day, while a clerk from the project was called in for two entire days. It was during this investigation that one of the committee members, Joe Starnes, famously asked Flanagan whether the Elizabethan playwright Christopher Marlowe was a member of the Communist Party, and mused that “Mr. Euripides” preached class warfare.”

    ==> Euripides, “The Bacchae”

    http://www.ordinary-gentlemen.com/2010/04/euripides-the-bacchae/

    Then, after that confusion, listen to: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pS614A5GzEw

    * The author is still working on this puzzle, and may have lost a few pieces …. the BP Sucks piece/deus ex machina seems to fit here:

    ==> “After the messenger has relayed this news, Pentheus’ mother, Agave, arrives carrying the head of her son. In her possessed state she believed it was the head of a mountain lion, and she killed him with her bare hands and pulled his head off. She proudly displays her son’s head to her father, believing it to be a hunting trophy. She is confused when Cadmus does not delight in her trophy, his face contorting in horror. By that time, however, Dionysus’ possession is beginning to wear off, and as Cadmus reels from the horror of his grandson’s death, Agave slowly realizes what she has done. The family is destroyed, with Agave and her sisters sent into exile. Cadmus and his wife Harmonia were actually honored by Dionysus when he turns them into snakes. Tiresias, the old, blind Theban prophet, is the only one not to suffer.”

    Appeals to Dionysus are in vain, and the play ends in lamentation…

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bacchae

    ???

  18. EmilianoZ

    If an institution like the CFPA is dependent on the personality of its leader for its efficiency, sooner or later it will be doomed.

    What you need is simple hard rules like mandatory plain vanilla contracts.

    1. NOTaREALmerican

      Re: What you need is simple hard rules like mandatory plain vanilla contracts.

      Ok, but – uh….

      How does this benefit the smart amoral scumbags that own the government and make the rules?

    2. /L

      Good people is always needed, a skilled dedicated person can set a standard and modus operandi for a new organization like this. Bad people can of course later destroy that.

  19. doc holiday

    Goethe once said of Shakespeare: “No one despised the material costume more than he; he knows the inner human costume quite well, and in this all of us are identical. It has been asserted that he portrayed the Romans splendidly; I don’t think this is so. They are nothing but flesh-and-blood Englishmen, and yet they are certainly human beings, human beings from head to foot, and even the Roman toga fits them well.”

    ==> Some things never change and if the toga fits …

    Pelosi, Geithner and Warren will all play out the parts they have — but, in the end, we all know that Warren will end up with a dagger in her back and the stage will be stained with red as the Romans go about the dirty business of corrupt politics.

    See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sicarii

  20. doc holiday

    I know this is a really old story but,

    Citigroup Board Says Pandit Deserved Bonus for 2009 ‘Progress
    http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-03-01/citigroup-board-says-pandit-deserved-bonus-for-2009-progress-.html

    ==> The Treasury Department owns 7.7 billion shares in Citigroup, which it got by converting $25 billion of the bailout funds into common stock. At the closing price of $3.40 on Feb. 26, the government’s 7.7 billion shares are worth $26.2 billion, for a paper profit of $1.2 billion.
    Treasury, FDIC
    The Treasury and Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. also own $5.3 billion of the bank’s junior debt.

    ==> Can someone explain to me why we have a Congressional Oversight Panel, with a nice person like Warren, but yet these crooks that went belly up are still getting bonuses — that’s just so F’ing amazing that Treasury is so blatantly corrupt and obviously mafia-run. If Warren was real, why has this continued, and why does DOJ allow this, why???? How many failed businesses end up paying themselves billions for failure and then be in a position where no one says a fucking word …… America is disgusting and Obama is as corrupt as Bush ….. why?

    1. K Ackermann

      Just give it to him.

      If they don’t, then we have to hear another round of whining from people like Larry Kudlow, and we have to watch Geithner scamper through the sewars to make it happen anyway.

      I just want to press my thumbs into these people’s eyeballs and press until I hear the high-pitched scream. Then I want to press more until it stops.

      We are afflicted with parasites and dumbasses.

      2012, baby. The year of the republicans, swept in on a wave of stupidity. Palin/Gingrich 2012. The end.

      1. NOTaREALmerican

        Re: 2012. The end.

        Not really “The end.” Just more of the same. Same stupendeous bowl, same (totally cool) perpetual wars, same hunt for eeeee-vile (doers), same looting of the country by the nobility, same pointless battles over fornicating-harlots & global-warming, same Blue-Team/Red-Team programs.

        Basically: Different Clowns, Same Circus.

    2. NOTaREALmerican

      Doc Doc Doc….

      Life isn’t about YOU (or the other American peasants), it’s about the smart amoral scumbags.

      Let’s review our rankings of privilege, shall we:

      * Nobility, vassals, peasants.

      * The nobility purchases sociopaths to run in elections voted upon by dumbasses “educated” by the media.

      See how easy it is to figure out WHY things happen now?

  21. Conor

    The fact that Elizabeth Warren is plucking feathers of big scary chickens means she’s doing a great job in my book.

    Go Elizabeth!!!!

  22. Mario

    Has anyone pointed out that Geithner looks like “Eric” from the movie Billy Madison?

      1. Doug Terpstra

        He has the looks and persona of Eddie Haskell (of ‘Leave It to Beaver’). I think Hussman Funds first observed that when Geithner went to Germany.

        “My that is a very lovely dress you’re wearing, Chancellor Merkel!”

  23. Matt

    Why not email the White House with the suggestion of Elizabeth Warren at Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Can’t hurt, right? Supposedly someone monitors these emails.

  24. S Brennan

    Elizabeth Warren for President…with Timothy Geithner as good will ambassador to the Antarctic

  25. Lefteris

    Did you guys see this one?

    economicpolicyjournal . com/2010/07/serious-tracking-of-americans-begins.html

    “As for your body, you will be required to have an “electronic health record”, by 2014. They snuck this into one of the “stimulus” bills. The electronic record will include an obesity rating. The information will be required to be on a “national exchange” with only secure access…”

  26. Francois T

    The “correction” from Treasury is anything but a correction. It is pure grade-AAA non-sequitur sophistry.

    From Glennzilla:
    http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/07/16/contradictions

    Regarding the Geithner/Warren story, here’s an email I received from the reporter at The Huffington Post who first reported that Geithner opposes Warren’s appointment, Shahien Nasiripou:

    I just read your post “Obama-era mysteries” in which you mention Geithner, Warren and my story on the controversy. Specifically, you write: “but his claim that Geithner opposes the appointment of Elizabeth Warren (first reported by The Huffington Post) is one which a Geithner aide now emphatically denies.” I just want to point out that Geithner’s aide, Michael Barr, never refuted the story. Not once.

    He, along with Geithner spokesman Andrew Williams and David Axelrod, simply told reporters that she was “exceptionally well-qualified” (or some variation on that) but never once did anyone refute the story. Their responses have been non-denial denials. Saying someone is qualified doesn’t mean you support his/her appointment.

Comments are closed.